The Week That Was

The Week That Was: All of Lawfare in One Post

By Raffaela Wakeman
Saturday, June 22, 2013, 10:00 AM

Lawfare readers probably already know that we had a few technical difficulties this week that resulted in the site's being intermittently inaccessible for a couple of days. We hope we're past all of that now, and apologize for the inconvenience. Fortunately, you can catch up on all that happened this week right here.

For the second week in a row, much Lawfare content was GTMO-related: we and the military commissions chief prosecutor got ready for the week-long hearings in United States v. Mohammed et al. Read Wells' and my live blogs of each day's sessions (Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday) and the Chief Prosecutor's statement on Friday evening.

Jack reflected on the significance of military commissions, particularly in light of some of last week's events in the United States v. Al-Nashiri hearings.

Bobby followed up on a previous post regarding counting among "associated forces" under the AUMF AQI and Al Nusrah.

John's wish for an State Department envoy to GTMO was answered: Clifford Sloan will fill the slot.

I shared the D.C. Circuit's opinions in Hussain v. Obama, which affirmed the District Court's denial of habeas corpus to a Guantanamo detainee. Ben ruminated on the majority's adoption of the "Duck Test."

Meanwhile, the Miami Herald got its (and by "its" I mean Carol Rosenberg's, of course) hands on a 2010 report from the Guantanamo Task Force on dispositions--thanks to litigation by group of Yale Law School students.

Jack noted the United States's latest brief in the ACLU's FOIA suit related to the targeted killing program.

Wells shared the White House's letter updating Congress on military operations, as required under the War Powers Resolution.

Paul previewed a seminar he attended at Roger Williams University Law School, entitled "Cyber Threats and Realities" and now is off to China for a few weeks.

Ben shared and commented on the Washington Post's most recent NSA-related story, this time on the history of various domestic collection programs initiated in the Bush administration. Bobby drew linkages between two national security controversies: NSA metadata and the targeted killing program. Steve, apropos of the NSA leaks, mulled a legislative response to the Supreme Court's decision in Clapper v. Amnesty International.

We noted the White House's statement regarding data collected under FISA Sections 702 and 215.

We had a number of guest posts filed: Kathleen Clark of Washington University Law on the reason for government outsourcing of highly classified work to private contractors; Susan Landau on metadata minimization; and Duke Law's Jeff Powell on targeted killing and due process.

Ben and Alan announced our first e-book, a compilation of Lawfare coverage of the NDAA debates.

Ben shared our latest Wiki page entries: a targeted killing resource page, collected by Samantha Goldstein, and a page on war powers, compiled by Alan Rozenshtein. If you want to help us assemble wiki pages or submit additional materials for these or the Al Bahlul case, drop me a line.

And that was the week that was.