Questions about the legal basis for, and prudence of, treating the president as a national security threat.
Jack Goldsmith is the Henry L. Shattuck Professor at Harvard Law School, co-founder of Lawfare, and a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution. Before coming to Harvard, Professor Goldsmith served as Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel from 2003-2004, and Special Counsel to the Department of Defense from 2002-2003.
Subscribe to this Lawfare contributor via RSS.
The United States has thus effectively shifted to an administrative regime for making international agreements, but it has yet to craft an adequate system of oversight and accountability to go along with that regime.
The views described in William Barr’s memo, far from crazy, have significant support in Supreme Court case law and executive branch precedent—and the real significance of the Barr memo may be its possible use in support of the impeachment of President Trump.
The cyber indictment strategy is a central element of the U.S. response to the ravages of theft and destruction by China. There’s one catch: it doesn’t seem to be working.
Until recently, Article II treaties have played a meaningful role in U.S. foreign relations law and policy. That no longer seems to be the case.
Here is the Winter 2018 Supplement for Bradley & Goldsmith, Foreign Relations Law: Cases and Materials (6th ed. 2017). These materials cover, among many other things, the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. Hawaii (the “travel ban” case), which is excerpted with questions; the Supreme Court’s decision in Jesner v.
The Road Map is now public. What does it teach about how Bob Mueller should think about his coming report?