How insulated from public opinion should an unelected agency wielding investigatory and prosecutorial power be?
Matthew Weybrecht practices law in Washington, D.C. Prior to law school he served as an officer in 3rd Ranger Battalion, where he deployed three times to Iraq and once to Afghanistan. Matt then worked as a Special Agent at the U.S. Department of State. The views expressed are his own.
Subscribe to this Lawfare contributor via RSS.
For your Friday afternoon, a round up on notable cybercrime cases currently unfolding.
This case's focus shifted to AE 386, the primary concern being how Touhy applies. First, does the CIA Touhy regulation exceed congressional delegation of power under 5 USC §301? Second, does the CIA Touhy regulation even govern the military commission process? And third, does the CIA Touhy regulation impose an unconstitutionally nonreciprocal burden on the defense?
To what extent would the First Amendment allow Congress to pass a law allowing the government to target speech that encourages individual acts of terrorism, either by shutting down websites or by prosecuting the “speakers” themselves?
In a letter recently released by Representative Mike Pompeo (R-KS), the State Department emphasized that the Iran deal – the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – is not binding under international law.
As memories of 9/11 continue to fade, courts are increasingly becoming bolder and more confident in asserting their oversight role over national security matters. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals provides the most recent example.
The New York Post recently reported on a hacker who claimed to have gained access to CIA Director John Brennan’s personal email account. There are a number of potential legal issues about this hacking attack, but we will briefly raise three.