We conducted a public opinion survey that found that Americans are sensitive to considerations of necessity, proportionality, and congressional authorization when evaluating whether the use of force is a justified response to a military threat from a foreign country. But what if the threat in question isn’t a conventional military one?
Megan Reiss is senior national security fellow with the R Street Institute, where she writes about cybersecurity and other pressing national security issues. Megan joined R Street in September 2017 from Office of U.S. Senator Ben Sasse, for whom she was also a senior national security fellow. Megan has a bachelor’s degree in human biology from Stanford University, an LL.M. in international criminal justice and armed conflict from the University of Nottingham School of Law, and a Ph.D. in public policy from the University of Texas at Austin’s Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs.
Subscribe to this Lawfare contributor via RSS.
John Bolton wants to get rid of the White House cybersecurity coordinator position. What could go wrong?
We set out to design a set of surveys to measure the extent to which public opinion—or, perhaps more accurately, the public’s moral intuition—aligns with legal considerations regarding the use of force. Our results surprised us.
Mark Zuckerberg is testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senate Commerce Committee and the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Here’s what members of Congress should ask him.
Learning from a ransomeware attack in Georgia.
Perspectives on cyber operations outside of the context of armed conflict and the applicability of international law.
North Korea has been supplying Syria with components for its chemical weapons and ballistic missile programs. This is both unsurprising and problematic.