The massive budget bill that passed this month allocates tens of billions of dollars to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and Homeland Security Investigation (HSI). The influx of funding of that scope and size will significantly expand the role DHS and immigration enforcement agencies play in American life.

What are the the institutional constraints on the FBI and law enforcement agencies compared to those on DHS and immigration enforcement? 

 To help unpack what these differences might mean for achieving policy objectives while protecting civil liberties and providing political accountability, host David Aaron is joined by Steve Cash, who comes with a wealth of high-level experience in Congress and the executive branch and who most recently served as Senior Advisor to the Under Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.  

Show Note:

• Just Security’s FBI Archive 
• Just Security’s DHS Archive

President Donald Trump this week put weapons behind his growing irritation with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s intransigence on negotiations to end the war in Ukraine. Meeting at the White House with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, President Trump announced that the United States will work with European allies in NATO to send advanced weapon systems, including Patriot missile batteries, to Ukraine. He also threatened tariffs and additional sanctions against Russia and countries that do business with it if it doesn’t ease its assault on Ukraine and make progress on stalled peace talks within 50 days. 

What impact is this policy shift likely to have on the war in Ukraine? Will the combination of military support for Ukraine and economic threats toward Russia succeed in forcing President Putin to the negotiating table, or could they spur further escalation? 

On this episode, host Viola Gienger is joined by Ambassador Daniel Fried and Dara Massicot to discuss Trump’s policy shift on Ukraine and its impact.

Show Notes:

• The Just Security Podcast: A Ukrainian MP Takes Stock of the NATO Summit and the Prospects for Peace, with Ukrainian MP Oleksiy Goncharenko, Lauren Van Metre, and Viola Gienger. 
• Ambassador Daniel Fried’s “Can Trump Seize a Win in Ukraine?” in Just Security 
• Ambassador Daniel Fried’s “How to Land the Emerging Deal on Peace for Ukraine” in Just Security 
• Just Security’s Russia-Ukraine War Archive 
• Russia's Eliminationist Rhetoric Against Ukraine: A Collection by Clara Apt in Just Security

In a picturesque valley in the mountains of eastern Bosnia, thousands of white gravestones bear witness to a mass atrocity that still struggles for a place in Europe’s conscience. Nearly 8,400 names are etched into a stone memorial, a stark reminder of the Srebrenica Genocide committed by Bosnian Serb forces against Bosnian Muslims in July 1995 – 30 years ago this year. And yet, too many political leaders and others continue denying the scale and scope of the travesty that unfolded there.

What has the world learned about genocide denial since Srebrenica? How has that denial echoed persistent efforts to negate or diminish the Holocaust? And how does denial and the politics around it tie into efforts to prevent a repeat elsewhere in the world?

Viola Gienger, Washington Senior Editor at Just Security is joined by Sead Turcalo, Professor of Security Studies at the University of Sarajevo and author of Thirty Years After the Srebrenica Genocide: Remembrance and the Global Fight Against Denial, published in Just Security; Velma Saric, founder and president of the Post-Conflict Research Center in Sarajevo; and Jacqueline Geis, Senior Director at the consulting firm Strategy for Humanity and a Research Fellow at the Human Rights Center at the University of California Berkeley School of Law

Show Notes:  

• Sead Turcalo’s “Thirty Years After the Srebrenica Genocide: Remembrance and the Global Fight Against Denial,” published in Just Security
• Jackie Geis’ “From Open-Source to All-Source: Leveraging Local Knowledge for Atrocity Prevention,” published in Just Security
• Velma Saric’s Post-Conflict Research Center and the associated blog Balkan Diskurs.
• Michael Schiffer and Pratima T. Narayan’s “Trump Administration’s Proposed Cuts to Accountability for Mass Atrocities Undermine Its Own Strategic Goal,” published in Just Security 
• Menachem Z. Rosensaft’s “Refuting Srebrenica Genocide Denial Yet Again, as UN Debates Draft Resolution,” published in Just Security
• Just Security’s Bosnia-Herzegovina archives 
• Just Security’s genocide archive 

Today, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) delivered its highly anticipated judgement in the case of Ukraine and the Netherlands v. Russia–a watershed moment in international human rights law. 

In this episode, Just Security Executive Editor and professor at American University Washington College of Law Rebecca Hamilton, and Just Security editorial board member and professor of International Law at the Fletcher School of Law & Diplomacy Tom Dannenbaum join Just Security co-editor-in-chief Ryan Goodman to break down the Court’s reasoning, the legal standards applied, and the potential ramifications for the ongoing conflict and the future of international justice. 

Show Note: 

• Tom Dannenbaum’s “Legal Frameworks for Assessing the Use of Starvation in Ukraine” in Just Security
• Olga Butkevych, Rebecca Hamilton, and Gregory Shaffer’s “International Law in the Face of Russia’s Aggression in Ukraine: The View from Lviv” 
• Ryan Goodman and Ambassador (ret) Keith Harper’s “Toward a Better Accounting of the Human Toll in Putin's War of Aggression” in Just Security 
• The Just Security Podcast: ICC Arrest Warrants for Russian Attacks on Ukraine’s Power Grid with Kateryna Busol, Rebecca Hamilton, and Paras Shah 
• Case of Ukraine and the Netherlands v. Russia Judgement (July 9, 2025) 

Iran’s nuclear program has long been a source of international tension. Early in U.S. President Donald Trump’s second term, hopes for a diplomatic resolution resurfaced—until June, when Israel launched strikes on Iranian nuclear and military sites. Days later, the United States joined the conflict, bombing three sites within Iran. Iran retaliated with missile attacks in Israel and a U.S. base in Qatar, and suspended cooperation with nuclear inspectors.

With both Washington and Tehran signaling interest in returning to talks despite the violence, what are the prospects for diplomacy now? To discuss where things stand and what a path forward might look like, Just Security’s co-editor-in-chief Tess Bridgeman is joined by Richard Nephew, a leading expert on Iran’s nuclear program and former Deputy Special Envoy for Iran.

Show Notes: 

• Just Security’s Israel-Iran Conflict Collection
• Richard Nephew’s “Did the Attacks on Iran Succeed?” in Foreign Affairs 
• Kelsey Davenport’s “Israeli Strikes Risk Driving Iran Toward Nuclear Weapons” in Just Security
• Brianna Rosen, Tess Bridgeman, and Nima Gerami’s “The Day After U.S. Strikes on Iran’s Nuclear Program: A Policy and Legal Assessment” in Just Security
• Brianna Rosen’s “Intelligence Implications of the Shifting Iran Strike Narrative” in Just Security
• Brian O’Neill’s “What Counts as a Win?: Battle Damage Assessments and Public Messaging” in Just Security
• Brian Finucane’s “The Need for a Congressional Rebuttal on Trump’s Iran Attack” in Just Security
• James Acton’s “Guest Post: Sorry, Mr. Secretary, producing uranium metal isn’t particularly difficult” in Arms Control Wonk

The leaders of NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance, just finished their annual Summit in The Hague in The Netherlands, as Ukraine continues its existential fight against Russia’s full-scale invasion that began more than three years ago. That invasion, preceded six years earlier by the capture of Crimea and parts of eastern Ukraine, set off the biggest war in Europe since World War II. 

How do Ukrainian leaders see the outcome of the NATO Summit? What are the prospects for negotiations, and how are Ukrainians faring in the meantime? And what about relations between Ukraine and the United States under this new administration in Washington? And with its European partners? 

Washington Senior Editor Viola Gienger and guest host Lauren Van Metre spoke with Ukrainian MP Oleksiy Goncharenko to answer some of these crucial questions. 

Show Notes:

• Just Security’s Russia-Ukraine War archive.
• Just Security’s tracking of Russia’s Eliminationist Rhetoric Against Ukraine
• Hidden in the U.S. Army’s New Reform Initiative Is a Warning for Europe by Jennifer Kavanagh
• Can Trump Seize a Win in Ukraine? By Ambassador Daniel Fried
• International Law at the Precipice: Holding Leaders Accountable for the Crime of Aggression in Russia’s War Against Ukraine by Mark Ellis

Over the past several days, the Trump administration has taken increasingly drastic steps in response to protest activity and unrest in Los Angeles — including federalizing 4,000 National Guard troops and sending hundreds of Marines, against the objections of California’s state and local leadership. 

As events unfold on the ground in LA, and in the lead-up to further anticipated protests this weekend, Just Security and the Reiss Center on Law and Security hosted a YouTube Live event to examine the pressing legal and policy issues at stake. 

Notes: 

• Watch the full June 12th, 2025 event on YouTube, here.
• Elizabeth Goitein: Senior Director, Liberty & National Security Program, Brennan Center for Justice
• Mary B. McCord: Visiting Professor of Law and Executive Director, Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection, Georgetown Law; Member, Board of Directors, Just Security 
• Steve Vladeck: Agnes Williams Sesquicentennial Professor of Federal Courts, Georgetown Law; Executive Editor, Just Security   
• Ryan Goodman: Anne and Joel Ehrenkranz Professor of Law and Faculty Co-Director, Reiss Center on Law and Security, NYU School of Law; Founding Co-Editor-in-Chief, Just Security 
• Just Security’s Civilian-Military Relations coverage. 
• Just Security’s Domestic Deployment of the U.S. Military coverage.  
• Just Security’s Law Enforcement archives. 

In recent years, the United States has sustained some of the most severe cyber threats in recent history– from the Russian-government directed hack SolarWinds to China’s prepositioning in U.S. critical infrastructure for future sabotage attacks through groups like Volt Typhoon. The Cybersecurity Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) is responsible for responding to, and protecting against these attacks.  

How do leaders steer through cyber crises, build trust, and chart a path forward? 

In conversation with Dr. Brianna Rosen, Just Security Senior Fellow and Director of the AI and Emerging Technologies Initiative, Jen Easterly, who just completed a transformative tenure as Director of CISA under the Biden Administration, unpacks the challenges, breakthroughs, and lessons from the front lines of America’s cybersecurity efforts.  

• Jen Easterly   
• Just Security’s Cybersecurity coverage 
• Empathy Matters: Leadership in Cyber by Jen Easterly ( 2019) 

For nearly 70 years, the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division led efforts to protect voting rights and fight racial discrimination at the polls. But in January 2025, DOJ political appointees froze all new civil rights cases and dismissed every major pending voting rights lawsuit—prompting most career attorneys to leave the Division. 

With federal challenges to restrictive voting laws now dropped in several states, the fight for voting rights falls to individual voters and advocacy groups, raising urgent questions about the future of enforcement.

In this episode Dani Schulkin, Director of Democracy Initiatives at Just Security, is joined by Chiraag Bains. Chiraag is a senior fellow at Democracy Fund, a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, and former Deputy Director of the White House Domestic Policy Council for Racial Justice & Equity. He also previously served in the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division. 

 Show Notes:  

• Chiraag Bains, “What Just Happened: The Trump Administration’s Dismissal of Voting Rights Lawsuits.” 
• Collection: Just Security’s Coverage of Trump Administration Executive Actions  
• Just Security’s DOJ Archives 
• Music: “Broken” by David Bullard from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/t/david-bullard/broken (License code: OSC7K3LCPSGXISVI)

The State Department has released a reorganization plan that would usher in significant changes to the way the United States conducts its diplomacy and foreign assistance, at a time of considerable geopolitical change. Proposals by the Trump administration include eliminating or restructuring a number of the Department’s longstanding functions, dissolving and/or folding USAID into State, and imposing large budget and staffing cuts. 

Debates over how to structure and optimize the State Department, and U.S. foreign assistance programs in particular, are nothing new. But important questions remain about these proposals—including how they may interact with Congressional prerogatives; their implications for the conduct of U.S. foreign policy amidst compounding global crises; and, ultimately, whether these changes may herald a more streamlined and effective bureaucracy or undermine U.S. diplomatic power.

On May 14, 2025, the Reiss Center on Law and Security and Just Security convened an expert panel to consider these vitally important developments and to unpack what’s happening, what’s at stake, and what lies ahead. 

Show Notes: 

• Dani Schulkin, Tess Bridgeman, and Andrew Miller’s “What Just Happened: The Trump Administration's Reorganization of the State Department – and How We Got Here” 
• Ambassador Daniel Fried’s “The US Government’s Self-Harm in Killing RFE/RL” and “Is the U.S. Abandoning the Fight Against Foreign Information Operations?” 
• Hon. Dafna Rand’s “Stopped Security Assistant: From Counter-Narcotics to Combating Human Trafficking Programs”  
• Michael Schiffer’s “Secretary of State Rubio’s Reorganization Plan Could Offer a Chance to Rescue U.S. Foreign Assistance -- If He’s Smart About It” 
• Music: “Broken” by David Bullard from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/t/david-bullard/broken (License code: OSC7K3LCPSGXISVI)

As the Supreme Court holds oral arguments on Thursday, May 15, Kristin A. Collins, Gerald Neuman and Rachel E. Rosenbloom argue that Executive Order 14160, which denies birthright citizenship to any child born in the United States who does not have at least one parent who is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident, clearly violates the birthright citizenship federal statute.  They note the statute has not received as much public attention, as they discuss the 1940s and 1950s legislative history.

Show notes:

• Kristin A. Collins, Gerald Neuman and Rachel E. Rosenbloom, Another Reason Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Order is Unlawful, Just Security, May 15, 2025

Now in its third year, the Russo-Ukraine War has upended the post-Cold War security landscape, exposing deep fractures in the global balance of power. 

As western unity frays and U.S. diplomacy shifts under President Trump, the war has become a flashpoint for competing visions of the international order. 

This week, the European Union gave Russia an ultimatum: accept a proposed ceasefire or face expanded sanctions—just days ahead of a potential round of direct peace talks in Istanbul on Thursday. The stakes are high, and the choices made this week could reshape not only the trajectory of the war but the future of global security.

How should we understand the prospects for a sustainable peace in Ukraine amidst evolving geopolitical dynamics and continued battlefield uncertainty? 

To help make sense of these developments, Just Security Senior Fellow and Director of the Oxford Programme for Cyber and Tech Policy, Brianna Rosen, sat down with Sir Lawrence Freedman, Emeritus Professor of War Studies at King's College London and Professor Janina Dill, Dame Louise Richardson Chair in Global Security at Oxford University’s Blavatnik School of Government. 

This conversation was part of the Calleva-Airey Neave Global Security Seminar Series at the University of Oxford. 

Show Notes: 

• Just Security's Russia-Ukraine War Archive 
• Ambassador Daniel Fried's "How to Land the Emerging Peace Deal on Peace for Ukraine"
• Music: “Broken” by David Bullard from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/t/david-bullard/broken (License code: OSC7K3LCPSGXISVI)

On Friday, May 9, senior White House official Stephen Miller said: "The Constitution is clear, and that, of course, is the supreme law of the land, that the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus can be suspended at a time of invasion. So I would say that’s an action we’re actively looking at." CNN later reported that President Donald Trump has been personally involved in discussions in the administration over potentially suspending habeas.

In this episode of the podcast, Ryan Goodman discusses the constitutional law on suspension of habeas, the context of Rümeysa Öztürk's release on a habeas petition on Friday shortly before Miller's remarks, and how the courts may respond.

Show notes:

1. Amy Coney Barrett, Suspension and Delegation, 99 Cornell Law Review 251 (2014) 

2. Case of Rümeysa Öztürk Link to case summary and key court documents:

 https://www.justsecurity.org/107087/tracker-litigation-legal-challenges-trump-administration/?js_filter=00374

3. Ryan Goodman and Dani Schulkin, A Pyrrhic Victory: Initial Supreme Court Gain for Trump on Alien Enemies Act May End in Administration’s Loss, Just Security, May 9, 2025

4. Ilya Somin, What Just Happened: The “Invasion” Executive Order and Its Dangerous Implications, Just Security, January 28, 2025

5. Ryan Goodman, The Actual Threat: Attacks on Habeas and Citizenship Rights, YouTube

An audio of Ilya Somin's Just Security article, which has become more topical by the day. The title: "What Just Happened: The Invasion Executive Order and Its Dangerous Implications." Somin is a Professor at the Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University, the B. Kenneth Simon Chair in Constitutional Studies at the Cato Institute, and author of Free to Move: Foot Voting, Migration and Political Freedom (Oxford University Press).

May 3rd marks World Press Freedom Day. This year especially, press freedom is under threat in the United States from a range of directions: from hostile official rhetoric and actions to self-censorship and systemic appeasement, to just basic information overload. As the Trump administration continues to “flood the zone,” how can we assess individual developments to discern broader trends that might help us better understand what’s happening, its impact and what we can do about it?  

Just Security Executive Editor and Professor of Law at American University, Rebecca Hamilton, joins Just Security Washington Senior Editor, Viola Gienger, to discuss how to grapple with the onslaught of news developments in the field of press freedom and discern broader trends. 

Show Notes:  

• Rebecca Hamilton’s “The Trump Administration’s Use of State Power: Keeping Track of the Big Picture” (May 2, 2025) 
• Rebecca Hamilton’s “Connecting the Dots: Trump’s Tightening Grip on Press Freedom” (Feb. 6, 2025)   
• Just Security’s Coverage of Trump Administration Executive Actions 
• Music: “Broken” by David Bullard from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/t/david-bullard/broken (License code: OSC7K3LCPSGXISVI)

In early April 2025, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released two major policies on Federal Agency Use of AI and Federal Procurement of AI - OMB memos M-25-21 and M-25-22, respectively. These memos were revised at the direction of President Trump’s January 2025 executive order, “Removing Barriers to American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence” and replaced the Biden-era guidance. Under the direction of the same executive order, the Department of Energy (DOE) also put out a request for information on AI infrastructure on DOE lands, following the announcement of the $500 billion Stargate project that aims to rapidly build new data centers and AI infrastructure throughout the United States. 

As the Trump administration is poised to unveil its AI Action Plan in the near future, the broader contours of its strategy for AI adoption and acceleration already seem to be falling into place.

Is a distinct Trump strategy for AI beginning to emerge—and what will that mean for the United States and the rest of the world?  

Show Notes:

• Joshua Geltzer
• Brianna Rosen  
• Just Security series, Tech Policy Under Trump 2.0
• Clara Apt and Brianna Rosen's article "Shaping the AI Action Plan: Responses to the White House's Request for Information" (Mar. 18, 2025)
• Justin Hendrix's article "What Just Happened: Trump's Announcement of the Stargate AI Infrastructure Project" (Jan. 22, 2025)
• Sam Winter-Levy's article "The Future of the AI Diffusion Framework" (Jan. 21, 2025)
• Clara Apt and Brianna Rosen's article, "Unpacking the Biden Administration's Executive Order on AI Infrastructure" (Jan. 16, 2025)
• Just Security's Artificial Intelligence Archive 
• Music: “Broken” by David Bullard from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/t/david-bullard/broken (License code: OSC7K3LCPSGXISVI

The North African country of Sudan marks two years of war this week. The fighting between rival military factions – the Sudanese army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces – has killed an estimated 150,000 people and forced more than 15 million people from their homes. Almost 25 million people face acute hunger, according to United Nations agencies. It’s the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. 

How did Sudan get to this point? What’s the current state of play in Sudan, and where does the country -- and the international community trying to support it -- go from here? 

Joining the show to answer some of these crucial questions two years into the war in Sudan is Quscondy Abdulshafi. He is a Senior Regional Advisor at Freedom House and has more than a decade of experience working on governance, democracy, and human rights in Africa and the United States.  

Show Notes:

• Quscondy Abdulshafi's article for Just Security, "Two Years of War in Sudan: From Revolution to Ruin and the Fight to Rise Again"
• Just Security Podcast episode “Assessing the Origins, Dynamics, and Future of Conflict in Sudan” with Executive Editor Matiangai Sirleaf, and three experts, Laura Nyantung Beny, Nisrin Elamin, Hamid Khalafallah, on Oct. 11, 2024.  
• Just Security Sudan Archive
• Music: “Broken” by David Bullard from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/t/david-bullard/broken (License code: OSC7K3LCPSGXISVI)

2025 will be a pivotal year for technology regulation in the United States and around the world. The European Union has begun regulating social media platforms with its Digital Services Act. In the United States, regulatory proposals at the federal level will likely include renewed efforts to repeal or reform Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Meanwhile, States such as Florida and Texas have tried to restrict content moderation by major platforms, but have been met with challenges to the laws' constitutionality.  

On March 19, NYU Law hosted a Forum on whether it is lawful, feasible, and desirable for government actors to regulate social media platforms to reduce harmful effects on U.S. democracy and society with expert guests Daphne Keller, Director of the Program on Platform Regulation at Stanford Law School’s Cyber Policy Center, and Michael Posner, Director of the Center for Business and Human Rights at NYU Stern School of Business. Tess Bridgeman and Ryan Goodman, co-editors-in-chief of Just Security, moderated the event, which was co-hosted by Just Security, the NYU Stern Center for Business and Human Rights and Tech Policy Press. 

Show Notes: 

• Tess Bridgeman 
• Ryan Goodman
• Daphne Keller 
• Michael Posner
• Just Security’s coverage on Social Media Platforms
• Just Security’s coverage on Section 230
• Music: “Broken” by David Bullard from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/t/david-bullard/broken (License code: OSC7K3LCPSGXISVI)

Presidents have long pursued policy prerogatives through the Department of Justice, but traditionally, there’s been a clear division between those and the Justice Department’s enforcement decisions. 

On March 5, 2025, the NYU Law Forum and the Reiss Center on Law and Security at NYU School of Law co-hosted an all-star panel of experts who have served in senior positions at the White House and in the Department of Justice to assess the degree to which the division between the President and the Justice Department has now changed. 

Among the topics they discussed are: What is the origin of and reason for the Justice Department’s measure of independence? How has this independence worked given the Justice Department’s mix of political and career employees, and how is the current administration observing those lines?  

The expert panel consisted of Vanita Gupta, a Distinguished Scholar in Residence at NYU School of Law and the former Associate Attorney General of the United States; Lisa Monaco, a Distinguished Scholar in Residence at the Reiss Center on Law and Security and the former Deputy Attorney General of the United States; and Breon Peace, the former United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York.  

Trevor Morrison, a former Associate White House Counsel, the Dean Emeritus, Eric M. and Laurie B. Roth Professor of Law, and a Faculty Co-Director of the Reiss Center on Law and Security, moderated the discussion.  

Show Notes: 

• Vanita Gupta
• Lisa Monaco
• Trevor Morrison (Bluesky)
• Breon Peace
• Just Security’s coverage of the Department of Justice
• Just Security’s coverage of the Trump administration’s executive actions 
• Music: “Broken” by David Bullard from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/t/david-bullard/broken (License code: OSC7K3LCPSGXISVI)

Alongside the new Trump administration, a new Congress has also taken power in Washington, D.C. The 119th Congress brings unified Republican control of both chambers with key votes – such as confirming many of President Trump’s cabinet nominees – complete, another focus will be on congressional investigations and oversight. 

What might the oversight landscape look like? What investigative priorities will take center stage? And what role will key actors, both inside and outside of Congress, play in shaping policy and accountability over the next year?

Joining the show to discuss what we can expect when it comes to congressional investigations is Ronak D. Desai. Ronak is the firmwide leader of the Congressional Investigations Practice at Paul Hastings LLP, where he advises clients facing high-stakes oversight inquiries and regulatory scrutiny. Ronak previously served on Capitol Hill in multiple roles, including most recently on a prominent select committee with members, including Adam Schiff, Adam Smith, Jim Jordan, and Mike Pompeo. In private practice, Ronak has handled a number of high-profile congressional investigations on behalf of clients on Capitol Hill both behind closed doors and publicly in the glare of the media spotlight. 

Show Notes:  

• Ronak D. Desai (LinkedIn – X) 
• Paras Shah (LinkedIn – X)
• Just Security’s coverage of Congress
• Just Security’s coverage of the Trump administration’s executive actions 
• Music: “Broken” by David Bullard from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/t/david-bullard/broken (License code: OSC7K3LCPSGXISVI)

In just his first six weeks in office, President Donald Trump has issued more than 80 executive orders and other actions, many of them targeting the federal workforce and the structure of the federal government. 

Just Security’s Co-Editor-in-Chief, Ryan Goodman, recently published a timeline of actions that highlight the alarming level of politicization and weaponization of the Department of Justice under the second Trump administration. Politicization includes the misuse of the Department’s powers for political purposes rather than the independent and impartial enforcement of the laws. Weaponization includes a deliberate and systematic misuse of the Department’s powers for political or personal purposes and in defiance of the rule of law. 

Goodman discussed the timeline with Just Security Senior Fellow Tom Joscelyn and Mary McCord, Executive Director of the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection (ICAP), Visiting Professor of Law at Georgetown University Law Center, and former Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security at the Justice Department. 

Show Notes: 

• Ryan Goodman (Bluesky – LinkedIn)
• Tom Joscelyn (Bluesky – X) 
• Mary B. McCord
• Ryan’s Just Security article (with Audrey Balliette) “Timeline: Politicization and Weaponization of Justice Department in Second Trump Administration”
• Just Security’s coverage of the Trump administration’s executive actions 
• Music: “Broken” by David Bullard from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/t/david-bullard/broken (License code: OSC7K3LCPSGXISVI)

In his second term in office, President Donald Trump has already taken sweeping measures on immigration, the environment, the U.S. military, and the structure of the federal government.

With so many executive orders, policy changes, and novel actions, it’s easy to wonder, “What just happened?” In this podcast mini-series we help to answer exactly that question. 

On each episode of “What Just Happened,” we’ll talk with leading experts, from former government officials to professors – the people who understand how government works from the inside and have studied the issues for years. They will explain the legal background and implications of how the Trump administration’s actions affect how the U.S. government operates in Washington, across the country, and around the world. 

This is not a political podcast. We are explaining the meaning and consequences of policy changes that may not be immediately apparent. Any opinions expressed are those of the speaker.

Today, we are looking at a relatively narrow example of the Trump administration’s broad policies of eliminating federal jobs and eliminating what it considers to be DEI efforts from federal agencies. Specifically, we will talk about a small number of seasoned intelligence officers who were fired because one of their duties involved agency DEI efforts. They have sought an injunction against their termination in federal court in the Eastern District of Virginia. After a brief administrative stay, a federal judge denied their application for a temporary restraining order while the case proceeds.  

Our guest today is the fired officers’ attorney, Kevin Carroll. Kevin is a partner at the Fluet law firm in Northern Virginia. Kevin is a retired Army Colonel and a former CIA case officer. He also served as a senior counsel to Republican congressman Peter King of New York and a political appointee in the first Trump administration, and later as a surrogate for the 2024 Kamala Harris campaign. 

Show Notes: 

• David Aaron (LinkedIn – X – Bluesky)
• Kevin Carroll (LinkedIn)
• Paras Shah (LinkedIn – X)
• Just Security’s coverage of the Trump administration’s executive actions 
• Music: “Broken” by David Bullard from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/t/david-bullard/broken (License code: OSC7K3LCPSGXISVI)

In his second term in office, President Donald Trump has already taken sweeping measures on immigration, the environment, the U.S. military, and the structure of the federal government.

With so many executive orders, policy changes, and novel actions, it’s easy to wonder, “What just happened?” In this podcast mini-series we help to answer exactly that question. 

On each episode of “What Just Happened,” we’ll talk with leading experts, from former government officials to practitioners and professors – the people who understand how government works from the inside and have been engaged with these issues for years. They will explain the legal background and implications of how the Trump administration’s actions affect how the U.S. government operates in Washington, across the country, and around the world.

As always, this is not a political podcast – we are explaining the meaning and consequences of policy changes that may not be immediately apparent. Any opinions expressed are those of the speaker.

Today, we will focus on the federal civil service. What are the different types of civil servants, what protections do they have, what remedies are available to them, and what comes next for those Americans who have dedicated their careers to public service.

Our guest is Suzanne Summerlin. Suzanne is a labor and employment attorney specializing in federal workforce issues. She has extensive experience in litigation, union advocacy, and federal labor policy. Among other jobs, Suzanne was previously an attorney for the National Federation of Federal Employees. 

This podcast does not contain legal advice. If you need legal assistance, you should contact an attorney. 

Show Notes: 

• David Aaron (LinkedIn – X)
• Tess Bridgeman (LinkedIn – BlueSky – X)
• Ryan Goodman (Bluesky – LinkedIn) 
• Suzanne Summerlin (LinkedIn)
• Suzanne’s Just Security articles “Beware the ‘Deferred Resignation’ Offer: A Legally Dubious Proposal for Federal Employees” and “Federal Employee Rights: What Probationary Employees Need to Know” 
• Just Security’s coverage of the Trump administration’s executive actions 
• Music: “Broken” by David Bullard from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/t/david-bullard/broken (License code: OSC7K3LCPSGXISVI)

The Artificial Intelligence Action Summit recently concluded in Paris, France, drawing world leaders including U.S. Vice President JD Vance. The Summit led to a declaration on “inclusive and sustainable” artificial intelligence, which the United States and United Kingdom have refused to join, though 60 other nations, including China and India support the declaration. 

What are the key takeaways from the Summit? How might it shape other global efforts to regulate artificial intelligence? 

Joining the show to discuss the Summit is Dr. Brianna Rosen, Director of Just Security’s AI and Emerging Technologies Initiative and Senior Research Associate at the University of Oxford.  

Show Notes:

• Brianna Rosen (LinkedIn – X – Bluesky)
• Paras Shah (LinkedIn – X)
• Just Security’s Artificial Intelligence coverage
• Just Security’s Tech Policy under Trump 2.0 Series
• Music: “Parisian Dream” by Albert Behar from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/t/albert-behar/parisian-dream (License code: RXLDKOXCM02WX2LL)

Around the world, lawyers – particularly those representing human rights defenders, political prisoners, and upholding the rule of law – face threats of disbarment, harassment, and prosecution simply for doing their jobs. 

Jan. 24 marked International Day of the Endangered Lawyer, which focused on Belarus this year. The Belarusian government has developed a toolkit of repression to silence members of the legal profession, with hundreds of lawyers facing disbarment or exile, and at least six sitting in jail based on dubious or politically-motivated charges. 

What tactics is the Belarusian government using? How can the international community best respond to support the legal profession and the rule of law? 

Joining the show to discuss the situation in Belarus are Nils Muiznieks, Maksim Polovinko, and Margaret Satterthwaite. 

Nils is the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus. He is a political scientist and human rights expert based in Latvia. Maksim is an expert of the Right to Defense project, until 2020, he was Editor-in-Chief of the magazine Jurist, and an event organizer for the Belarussian legal community. Margaret is a Professor of Clinical Law at NYU Law and the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers 

Show Notes: 

• Nils Muižnieks (LinkedIn) 
• Maksim Polovinko
• Margaret Satterthwaite (LinkedIn – X) 
• Paras Shah (LinkedIn – X)
• Nils and Margaret’s Just Security article with Aloysia Sonnet (LinkedIn) “Solidarity Needed Amid Stranglehold on Belarusian Lawyers”
• Just Security’s Belarus coverage
• Just Security’s Rule of Law coverage
• Music: “Broken” by David Bullard from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/t/david-bullard/broken (License code: OSC7K3LCPSGXISVI)