Podcast appearances and mentions of alan rozenshtein

Page Hedley, Senior Advisor at Forecasting Research Institute and co-author of the Not for Private Gain letter urging state attorneys general to stop OpenAI's planned restructuring, and Gad Weiss, the Wagner Fellow in Law & Business at NYU Law, join Kevin Frazier, AI Innovation and Law Fellow at Texas Law and Senior Editor at Lawfare, and Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor at Minnesota Law and Senior Editor at Lawfare, to analyze news of OpenAI once again modifying its corporate governance structure. The group break down the rationale for the proposed modification, the relevant underlying law, and the significance of corporate governance in shaping the direction of AI development.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From January 4, 2022: Government secrecy is pervasive when it comes to national security and foreign affairs, and it's becoming more and more common for state and even local governments to invoke government secrecy rationales that in the past, only the president of the United States and the national intelligence community were able to claim. While some of the secrecy is no doubt necessary to ensure that police investigations aren't compromised and state and local officials are getting candid advice from their staff, government secrecy directly threatens government transparency and thus democratic accountability. Alan Rozenshtein spoke about these issues with Christina Koningisor, a law professor at the University of Utah and the author of “Secrecy Creep” a recently published article in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review, along with the Lawfare post summarizing her work.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The social media platform X, run by Elon Musk, has filed a federal lawsuit challenging a Minnesota law barring the use of deepfakes to influence an election.The lawsuit, filed Wednesday against Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, claims the law — passed with bipartisan support in the Legislature in 2023 — violates free speech rights. The law made it a crime to post fake videos that could be used to influence an election. Legislators were concerned that deepfakes, made with AI and digital editing, could be used to spread misinformation about candidates. It carries potential penalties of fines and prison time.Alan Rozenshtein, a University of Minnesota law professor who specializes in technology and the constitution, joined Minnesota Now to talk about the lawsuit.

From December 15, 2020: Alan Rozenshtein sat down with Yaya Fanusie, a former CIA analyst and an expert on the national security implications of cryptocurrencies, who recently published a paper as part of Lawfare's ongoing Digital Social Contract research paper series, entitled, "Central Bank Digital Currencies: The Threat From Money Launderers and How to Stop Them." They talked about how central banks are exploring digital currencies, how those currencies might in turn be used by criminals and terrorist groups, and how governments and the private sector should respond.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From October 6, 2023: The First Amendment protects speech, but what kind? True speech, sure. But what about false or misleading speech? What if it's harmful? After all, you can't yell fire in a crowded theater—or can you?To answer these questions, Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare spoke with Jeff Kosseff, who is an Associate Professor of Cybersecurity Law in the United States Naval Academy's Cyber Science Department and a Contributing Editor at Lawfare. Jeff is releasing his latest book this month, titled "Liar in a Crowded Theater: Freedom of Speech in a World of Misinformation," in which he describes, and defends, the First Amendment's robust protections for false and misleading speech.They spoke about the book, why you sometimes can yell fire in a crowded theater, and how new technology both superchargers misinformation and provides new tools to fight it.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Scott sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor and co-host emeritus Alan Rozenshtein and Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett to talk through the week's big national security news, including:“Lowering the Bar.” Last week, the Trump administration took aim at two leading law firms—Covington & Burling and Perkins Coie—by repealing lawyers' security clearances and setting limits on the extent to which government actors can contract with them, on the apparent grounds that they worked for Trump's perceived enemies. Is this legal? Will it be challenged? And what will the effect be on the legal industry?“Big Math on Campus.” The Trump administration recently announced its intent to withhold $400 million in government grants from Columbia University, on the grounds that it had not done enough to combat anti-semitism on campus—a measure it paired with an indication that it would repeal student visas from those who had expressed “pro-Hamas” views. Is this tack a proper or legally sustainable one? And what impact will it have on academic communities in the United States?“Nothing Is Certain but Death and Ta…Well, at Least Death.” After temporarily delaying tariffs on Canada and Mexico after 48 hours last month, President Trump assured everyone that they were definitely getting installed this month. But once again, after a few days, he rescinded many of them. Nonetheless, the uncertainty surrounding this administration's policies has markets spooked, triggering fears of a recession—something President Trump has indicated people may just have to live through. What are the real costs and benefits of Trump's oscillating trade policies?In object lessons, Alan went full nerd and prescribed himself a decade-long literary exile with “Gardens of the Moon,” the first in Steven Erikson's ten-book epic. Scott's old ass, meanwhile, threw its weight behind “My Old Ass,” a film about a young woman navigating family, love, and self-discovery—all with a little hallucinogenic assistance. And Natalie logrolled like a pro, plugging Quinta Jurecic's guest spot on The Ezra Klein Show, where Quinta delivers one of Natalie's all-time favorite “Quintaisms”—with all the necessary context baked right in.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Scott sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor and co-host emeritus Alan Rozenshtein and Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett to talk through the week's big national security news, including:“Lowering the Bar.” Last week, the Trump administration took aim at two leading law firms—Covington & Burling and Perkins Coie—by repealing lawyers' security clearances and setting limits on the extent to which government actors can contract with them, on the apparent grounds that they worked for Trump's perceived enemies. Is this legal? Will it be challenged? And what will the effect be on the legal industry?“Big Math on Campus.” The Trump administration recently announced its intent to withhold $400 million in government grants from Columbia University, on the grounds that it had not done enough to combat anti-semitism on campus—a measure it paired with an indication that it would repeal student visas from those who had expressed “pro-Hamas” views. Is this tack a proper or legally sustainable one? And what impact will it have on academic communities in the United States?“Nothing Is Certain but Death and Ta…Well, at Least Death.” After temporarily delaying tariffs on Canada and Mexico after 48 hours last month, President Trump assured everyone that they were definitely getting installed this month. But once again, after a few days, he rescinded many of them. Nonetheless, the uncertainty surrounding this administration's policies has markets spooked, triggering fears of a recession—something President Trump has indicated people may just have to live through. What are the real costs and benefits of Trump's oscillating trade policies?In object lessons, Alan went full nerd and prescribed himself a decade-long literary exile with “Gardens of the Moon,” the first in Steven Erikson's ten-book epic. Scott's old ass, meanwhile, threw its weight behind “My Old Ass,” a film about a young woman navigating family, love, and self-discovery—all with a little hallucinogenic assistance. And Natalie logrolled like a pro, plugging Quinta Jurecic's guest spot on The Ezra Klein Show, where Quinta delivers one of Natalie's all-time favorite “Quintaisms”—with all the necessary context baked right in.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From August 18, 2021: Earlier this month, Tucker Carlson, whose nightly news show on Fox has become the most popular show in U.S. cable news history, traveled to Budapest to record a special version of his show. The centerpiece of his visit was an interview with Hungary's authoritarian leader, Viktor Orbán. But far from criticizing Orbán or questioning him on Hungary's increasing move away from liberal democracy, Carlson was all compliments, praising the fence that Hungary has built along its border and allowing Orbán to lash out against his critics at home and abroad.Carlson is not the only one with kind words for Hungary's would-be strongman. In the past months, an increasing number of conservative media and intellectual elites have praised Hungary, as well as earlier models like Portugal under the post-World War II right-wing dictator António Salazar, for what they view as its willingness to use state power to fight for conservative social, cultural and religious values.To discuss what this embrace of foreign authoritarianism means for the American conservative movement, Alan Rozenshtein spoke with Zack Beauchamp, a senior correspondent at Vox, who has written about the right's embrace of Orbánism and what it means for the future of American democracy.We value your feedback! Help us improve by sharing your thoughts at lawfaremedia.org/survey. Your input ensures that we deliver what matters most to you. Thank you for your support—and, as always, for listening!To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Jack Goldsmith, the Learned Hand Professor at Harvard Law School and co-founder of Lawfare, joins Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, to talk about his recent Lawfare article discussing last year's Supreme Court decision in Trump v. United States and its implications for executive power. They discuss how the ruling extends beyond presidential immunity, the broader shift toward a maximalist theory of executive authority, and what this means for the future of American democracy.We value your feedback! Help us improve by sharing your thoughts at lawfaremedia.org/survey. Your input ensures that we deliver what matters most to you. Thank you for your support—and, as always, for listening!To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Chris Miller, a professor at the Fletcher School at Tufts University and Nonresident Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and Marshall Kosloff, Senior Fellow at the Niskanen Center and co-host of the Realignment Podcast, join Kevin Frazier, a Contributing Editor at Lawfare and adjunct professor at Delaware Law, and Alan Rozenshtein, Senior Editor at Lawfare and associate professor of law at the University of Minnesota, to discuss AI, supply chains, and the Abundance Agenda.We value your feedback! Help us improve by sharing your thoughts at lawfaremedia.org/survey. Your input ensures that we deliver what matters most to you. Thank you for your support—and, as always, for listening!To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In a live conversation on January 23, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes spoke to Lawfare Senior Editors Scott R. Anderson, Anna Bower, Quinta Jurecic, and Alan Rozenshtein and assistant law professor at Pace University Amelia Wilson about the first batch of executive orders by President Trump in his second term, including suspending enforcement of the TikTok ban, the use of the military at the border, the birthright citizenship order, and the legal challenges some of these orders are facing.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues and hosts emeriti Benjamin Wittes, Quinta Jurecic, and Alan Rozenshtein to talk through the week's big—and we mean BIG—national security news, including:“Executive Disorder.” America's once-and-future President Donald Trump hit the ground running, issuing dozens of executive actions on his first afternoon in office, from once again withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement to pardoning or commuting the sentences for almost everyone involved in the Jan. 6 insurrection. But which actions are important and which are just for the show? And what do they tell us about what to expect from a second Trump presidency?“Swiping Up on Consistency.” The Supreme Court's decision to uphold the law banning TikTok triggered an unexpected crisis last week, as TikTok users who suddenly realized the platform was in danger apparently mounted a pressure campaign against elected officials that led several, including President Biden, to waffle on the desirability of the ban. But incoming President Donald Trump, who once tried to ban TikTok himself, jumped in with an order temporarily delaying the ban—a move that TikTok thanked him for by name in a notice on the platform after service was restored. What explains the sudden about-face among supporters of the TikTok ban?“Cease and Assist.” After more than a year of brutal hostilities, the parties have finally agreed to a ceasefire in the conflict over Gaza. But as Israeli hostages are gradually let free, humanitarian assistance resumes, and displaced Gazans return to their devastated neighborhoods, real questions remain. Is this just a pause or an end to the conflict? And what comes next in Gaza either way? In object lessons, Ben encouraged listeners to listen to Merrick Garland's farewell speech to the Justice Department, regardless of how you feel about the former attorney general. Quinta embraced a sense of escapism with her praise of the Wallace & Gromit movies, particularly the newest addition to the franchise, Wallace & Gromit: Vengeance Most Fowl. And Scott—wondering what will become of us now—mustered up his best inner disgruntled, middle-aged Millennial voice to recommend Michael Longfellow's plea to not ban TikTok from SNL's Weekend Update.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues and hosts emeriti Benjamin Wittes, Quinta Jurecic, and Alan Rozenshtein to talk through the week's big—and we mean BIG—national security news, including:“Executive Disorder.” America's once-and-future President Donald Trump hit the ground running, issuing dozens of executive actions on his first afternoon in office, from once again withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement to pardoning or commuting the sentences for almost everyone involved in the Jan. 6 insurrection. But which actions are important and which are just for the show? And what do they tell us about what to expect from a second Trump presidency?“Swiping Up on Consistency.” The Supreme Court's decision to uphold the law banning TikTok triggered an unexpected crisis last week, as TikTok users who suddenly realized the platform was in danger apparently mounted a pressure campaign against elected officials that led several, including President Biden, to waffle on the desirability of the ban. But incoming President Donald Trump, who once tried to ban TikTok himself, jumped in with an order temporarily delaying the ban—a move that TikTok thanked him for by name in a notice on the platform after service was restored. What explains the sudden about-face among supporters of the TikTok ban?“Cease and Assist.” After more than a year of brutal hostilities, the parties have finally agreed to a ceasefire in the conflict over Gaza. But as Israeli hostages are gradually let free, humanitarian assistance resumes, and displaced Gazans return to their devastated neighborhoods, real questions remain. Is this just a pause or an end to the conflict? And what comes next in Gaza either way? In object lessons, Ben encouraged listeners to listen to Merrick Garland's farewell speech to the Justice Department, regardless of how you feel about the former attorney general. Quinta embraced a sense of escapism with her praise of the Wallace & Gromit movies, particularly the newest addition to the franchise, Wallace & Gromit: Vengeance Most Fowl. And Scott—wondering what will become of us now—mustered up his best inner disgruntled, middle-aged Millennial voice to recommend Michael Longfellow's plea to not ban TikTok from SNL's Weekend Update.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From July 11, 2022: We often use the terms democracy and liberal democracy interchangeably, but they're not the same thing. Democracy means majority rule and public participation. Liberal democracy means democracy plus minority rights. There's no guarantee that democracy will be liberal. And in fact, some of the same things that enable democracy can also undermine its liberal commitments.Zac Gershberg, a professor of journalism and media studies at Idaho State University and Sean Illing, the host of the Vox Conversations podcast, have recently released a new book, The Paradox of Democracy: Free Speech, Open Media, and Perilous Persuasion.In the book, they argue that every democracy is fundamentally shaped by the dominant media technology of its time. And that the current landscape of social media and cable news fuels our democracy, but also pushes it in an illiberal authoritarian direction. Alan Rozenshtein spoke with Zac and Sean about how American democracy got to this point, how the present compares to the past, and what, if anything, can be done to put liberal democracy on firmer footing.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Donald Trump officially becomes president today and he's pledged to save TikTok upon taking office. The app is now technically banned in the U.S., though after much turmoil this weekend, users can still log into their accounts. Trump said he not only wants to delay the ban, but work out a deal that would make the U.S. a partial owner in TikTok. On POLITICO Tech, law professor and former DOJ attorney Alan Rozenshtein returns to break down what could happen next in this saga. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On Sunday, TikTok could be gone for good in the U.S. Users have been spiraling over the possibility and savoring their last days. The video app gained popularity during the COVID-19 pandemic and quickly became a means of entertainment, information and even income. A federal appeals court upheld a ruling that gave TikTok an ultimatum: sell off its U.S. operation to a company not owned by China or shut down. That deadline is on Sunday. The platform asked the U.S. Supreme Court to put a halt on the ban, but justices have yet to make a decision. Professor of law Alan Rozenshtein has been following this case closely. He joined MPR News host Nina Moini to explain the legal limbo and its implications.

TikTok is set to be banned in the U.S. in just nine days. Today, the company will try to convince the Supreme Court to strike the ban down — or at least put it on ice. And President-elect Donald Trump has requested the Supreme Court punt the ban until after he's taken office and can try to broker some sort of solution. Still, TikTok has some long odds. On POLITICO Tech, host Steven Overly talks with Alan Rozenshtein, a law professor at the University of Minnesota Law School and former lawyer in the Justice Department, about what to watch for during today's arguments. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It's time for Lawfare's annual "Ask Us Anything" podcast.You called in with your questions, and Lawfare contributors have answers! Benjamin Wittes, Kevin Frazier, Quinta Jurecic, Eugenia Lostri, Alan Rozenshtein, Scott R. Anderson, Natalie Orpett, Amelia Wilson, Anna Bower, and Roger Parloff addressed questions on everything from presidential pardons to the risks of AI to the domestic deployment of the military.Thank you for your questions. And as always, thank you for listening.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For the podcast's annual end-of-year episode, Scott sat down with co-hosts emeritus Alan Rozenshtein and Quinta Jurecic to talk over listener-submitted topics and object lessons, including:How will the collapse of the Assad regime impact the region? And can the United States help create a secular, democratic Syria?How is the pending TikTok ban even enforceable (if it is)?What national security story from 2024 deserved more attention?Won't the Fifth Circuit's recent Tornado Cash opinion simply lead the Treasury Department to sanction the cryptocurrency Ethereum as a whole?What are the most underrated threats to U.S. national security in the last half of this decade?What will be the Trump administration's first major national security misstep?How worried should the United States be about the BRIC countries' recent discussions of forming their own reserve currency?For object lessons, Trevor recommended insightful indie video games for our three hosts based on their interests: “Bury Me, My Love” for Scott; “We. The Revolution” for Alan; and “Not for Broadcast” for Quinta. Thomas endorsed the podcast and associated media company “Popular Front” on uncovered conflict issues. Keith threw his support behind the podcast “It Did Happen Here” about Portland's anti-racist skinhead movement. Connor recommended the books “The Queen of Cuba,” by Peter Lapp, and “The President's Book of Secrets,” by Lawfare alum David Priess, as well as the docuseries “FBI True.” Keenan followed up with another book recommendation, Daniel Immewahr's “How to Hide an Empire.” And Liz endorsed Gayle Tzemach Lemmon's “Ashley's War,” about women who deployed to Afghanistan as cultural support teams for special operations units.And that's it for 2024! But don't worry, Rational Security and the whole Lawfare team will be back with you in the new year to help make sense of what's to come in national security in 2025—now back at our old release day and time, at midday on Wednesdays (D.C.-time) every week!To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For the podcast's annual end-of-year episode, Scott sat down with co-hosts emeritus Alan Rozenshtein and Quinta Jurecic to talk over listener-submitted topics and object lessons, including:How will the collapse of the Assad regime impact the region? And can the United States help create a secular, democratic Syria?How is the pending TikTok ban even enforceable (if it is)?What national security story from 2024 deserved more attention?Won't the Fifth Circuit's recent Tornado Cash opinion simply lead the Treasury Department to sanction the cryptocurrency Ethereum as a whole?What are the most underrated threats to U.S. national security in the last half of this decade?What will be the Trump administration's first major national security misstep?How worried should the United States be about the BRIC countries' recent discussions of forming their own reserve currency?For object lessons, Trevor recommended insightful indie video games for our three hosts based on their interests: “Bury Me, My Love” for Scott; “We. The Revolution” for Alan; and “Not for Broadcast” for Quinta. Thomas endorsed the podcast and associated media company “Popular Front” on uncovered conflict issues. Keith threw his support behind the podcast “It Did Happen Here” about Portland's anti-racist skinhead movement. Connor recommended the books “The Queen of Cuba,” by Peter Lapp, and “The President's Book of Secrets,” by Lawfare alum David Priess, as well as the docuseries “FBI True.” Keenan followed up with another book recommendation, Daniel Immewahr's “How to Hide an Empire.” And Liz endorsed Gayle Tzemach Lemmon's “Ashley's War,” about women who deployed to Afghanistan as cultural support teams for special operations units.And that's it for 2024! But don't worry, Rational Security and the whole Lawfare team will be back with you in the new year to help make sense of what's to come in national security in 2025—now back at our old release day and time, at midday on Wednesdays (D.C.-time) every week!To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A new law gives TikTok a January 19 deadline to sell to a non-Chinese company or face a nationwide ban. Law professor Alan Rozenshtein delves into what this means and whether President-Elect Trump could intervene.David Bianculli reflects on the year in TV.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

In response to the compromise of telecommunication companies by the Chinese hacker group Salt Typhoon, senior officials from the FBI and CISA recommended that American citizens use encrypted messaging apps to minimize the chances of their communications being intercepted. This marks a departure in law enforcement's position on the use of encrypted communications. Susan Landau, Professor of Cyber Security and Policy in Computer Science at Tufts University, and Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota Law School and Research Director and Senior Editor at Lawfare, sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor Eugenia Lostri to talk about what the recent FBI recommendation in favor of the use of encrypted messaging apps means for the “Going Dark” debate. To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A new law gives TikTok a January 19 deadline to sell to a non-Chinese company or face a nationwide ban. Law professor Alan Rozenshtein delves into what this means and whether President-Elect Trump could intervene.David Bianculli reflects on the year in TV.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

At a virtual panel conversation co-hosted by Lawfare and NYU's Center for Technology Policy, center Director Scott Brennen moderated a conversation between Lawfare Senior Editor and University of Minnesota law professor Alan Rozenshtein, University of North Carolina law professor Mary-Rose Papandrea, and Georgetown law professor Anupam Chander, about the recent D.C. Circuit decision upholding the TikTok divestment-or-ban law and what that means for the future of both TikTok and the First Amendment.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Scott sat down with Lawfare Senior Editors Molly Reynolds and Alan Rozenshtein, and with University of Houston Law Center Assistant Professor of Law Chris Mirasola, to talk through the week's big national security news, including:“Troops, There It Is.” President-elect Donald Trump raised eyebrows this week when he suggested that he intended to declare a national emergency and use U.S. soldiers to implement his planned deportation of undocumented migrants from the United States—the first of many potential domestic uses of the military some fear he will pursue. But does the president have the authority to use the military in this way? And is a(nother) national emergency really necessary?“Break It ‘Til You Make It.” Some have expressed serious doubt as to whether the incoming Trump administration's flurry of highly controversial nominees for senior positions in government will be able to successfully make its way through even the Republican-held Senate. But doing so may not be necessary, as Trump's allies are reportedly exploring a legal scheme by which he can use a never-before-used authority to adjourn Congress to force the Senate into an extended recess, and then appoint his preferred nominees as recess appointments. How plausible is this legal theory? And what role is it likely to play in Trump's confirmation strategy?“Rolling Back the Clock.” While he was once one of TikTok's greatest enemies, President-elect Trump has changed his tune: on the campaign trail, he came out against the ban on the controversial social media platform passed by Congress, which is sent to go into effect early next year if its China-associated owners do not divest. Will Trump try to come to TikTok's rescue? And if so, what could he do?Note: We will be taking the week of Thanksgiving off, but we'll be back with a new episode of Rational Security on Thursday, December 5. We're thankful for your continued support of the show!To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Scott sat down with Lawfare Senior Editors Molly Reynolds and Alan Rozenshtein, and with University of Houston Law Center Assistant Professor of Law Chris Mirasola, to talk through the week's big national security news, including:“Troops, There It Is.” President-elect Donald Trump raised eyebrows this week when he suggested that he intended to declare a national emergency and use U.S. soldiers to implement his planned deportation of undocumented migrants from the United States—the first of many potential domestic uses of the military some fear he will pursue. But does the president have the authority to use the military in this way? And is a(nother) national emergency really necessary?“Break It ‘Til You Make It.” Some have expressed serious doubt as to whether the incoming Trump administration's flurry of highly controversial nominees for senior positions in government will be able to successfully make its way through even the Republican-held Senate. But doing so may not be necessary, as Trump's allies are reportedly exploring a legal scheme by which he can use a never-before-used authority to adjourn Congress to force the Senate into an extended recess, and then appoint his preferred nominees as recess appointments. How plausible is this legal theory? And what role is it likely to play in Trump's confirmation strategy?“Rolling Back the Clock.” While he was once one of TikTok's greatest enemies, President-elect Trump has changed his tune: on the campaign trail, he came out against the ban on the controversial social media platform passed by Congress, which is sent to go into effect early next year if its China-associated owners do not divest. Will Trump try to come to TikTok's rescue? And if so, what could he do?For object lessons, Alan recommended the childrens' audio player “Yoto,” to the fervent applause of the other guests and their young children. Molly embraced her Patrick Radden Keefe fandom one more time to recommend FX's forthcoming adaptation of his book, “Say Nothing.” Chris endorsed Jon Batiste's new album “Beethoven Blues.” And Scott urged listeners to follow his lead and take in an aptonymous double-feature this weekend: the new film “Saturday Night” and the first ever 1975 episode of “Saturday Night Live” that it's about.Note: We will be taking the week of Thanksgiving off, but we'll be back with a new episode of Rational Security on Thursday, December 5. We're thankful for your continued support of the show!To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editors Scott Anderson, Alan Rozenshtein, and Quinta Jurecic and Executive Director of the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection Mary McCord about Donald Trump's picks for his Cabinet and senior-level administration positions, including Matt Gaetz as attorney general and Pete Hegseth as secretary of defense, the possibility of Trump using the recess appointment power, and more.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Alan Rozenshtein, Benjamin Wittes, and Molly Reynolds to talk through the week's big national security news, including:“An Eye for an Iran.” After weeks of waiting, Israel finally launched the strikes on Iran it had long promised in response to the volley of missiles Iran hit it with earlier this month. Compared to expectations, the strikes were relatively limited and aimed primarily at Iranian military targets, instead of its nuclear and oil infrastructure. And the United States is now urging an end to these “tit-for-tat” strikes. But is this likely to be the case? Or are Israel's actions just the beginning of a bigger conflict?“He Just Slid into my DMs!” This week, the Wall Street Journal published a stunning report indicating that billionaire industrialist Elon Musk has been having previously undisclosed communications with Russian President Vladimir Putin and other senior Russian officials. How concerning should these conversations be? And what ramifications might they have for U.S. national security?“Post Mortem.” Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos's late decision to squash an official editorial board endorsement of Kamala Harris—and to abstain from presidential endorsements moving forward—has triggered a tidal wave of opposition, leading to hundreds of thousands of canceled subscriptions from a newspaper that was already set to lose substantial sums of money this year. How wrong-headed was Bezos's move? And what should the proper response be?For object lessons, Alan hyped the sci-fi classic "Hyperion Cantos," by Dan Simmons. Molly celebrated a profile of a former student of hers by the inestimable W. Kama Bell, which is part of a new Washington Post series on civil servants. Scott urged listeners to get out and participate in democracy this pre-Election Day weekend. And Ben logrolled for Lawfare's newest podcast endeavor: Escalation, an audio documentary series on the origins of the conflict in Ukraine.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Alan Rozenshtein, Benjamin Wittes, and Molly Reynolds to talk through the week's big national security news, including:“An Eye for an Iran.” After weeks of waiting, Israel finally launched the strikes on Iran it had long promised in response to the volley of missiles Iran hit it with earlier this month. Compared to expectations, the strikes were relatively limited and aimed primarily at Iranian military targets, instead of its nuclear and oil infrastructure. And the United States is now urging an end to these “tit-for-tat” strikes. But is this likely to be the case? Or are Israel's actions just the beginning of a bigger conflict?“He Just Slid into my DMs!” This week, the Wall Street Journal published a stunning report indicating that billionaire industrialist Elon Musk has been having previously undisclosed communications with Russian President Vladimir Putin and other senior Russian officials. How concerning should these conversations be? And what ramifications might they have for U.S. national security?“Post Mortem.” Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos's late decision to squash an official editorial board endorsement of Kamala Harris—and to abstain from presidential endorsements moving forward—has triggered a tidal wave of opposition, leading to hundreds of thousands of canceled subscriptions from a newspaper that was already set to lose substantial sums of money this year. How wrong-headed was Bezos's move? And what should the proper response be?For object lessons, Alan hyped the sci-fi classic "Hyperion Cantos," by Dan Simmons. Molly celebrated a profile of a former student of hers by the inestimable W. Kama Bell, which is part of a new Washington Post series on civil servants. Scott urged listeners to get out and participate in democracy this pre-Election Day weekend. And Ben logrolled for Lawfare's newest podcast endeavor: Escalation, an audio documentary series on the origins of the conflict in Ukraine.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor at the University of Minnesota Law School and Senior Editor at Lawfare, sits down with David Kris, founder of Culper Partners and the former Assistant Attorney General for National Security in the Obama administration, to talk about a new paper that David has published as part of Lawfare's ongoing Digital Social Contract series, entitled "A Data Proxy for Clients of Cloud Service Providers.”Kris argues that cloud storage offers significant benefits for security and efficiency, but many organizations may be hesitant to adopt it due to the risk of secret disclosure: the practice by which law enforcement can compel cloud service providers to turn over customer data while legally prohibiting them from notifying the customer. To address this concern, Kris proposes the appointment of a "data proxy," a highly trusted individual (like a retired federal judge) who would be contractually authorized to represent the organization's interests when it cannot represent itself due to a nondisclosure order.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This episode of “Lawfare Live: National Security and the 2024 Election” was recorded on October 15 in front of a live audience on Youtube and Zoom.Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes spoke to Lawfare Senior Editors Quinta Jurecic, Eugenia Lostri, and Alan Rozenshtein, Lawfare Tarbell Fellowin Artificial Intelligence Kevin Frazier, and Associate Professor of Law at St. John's University Law School Kate Klonick. They discussed former President Trump and Vice President Harris's positions on various tech policies, like content moderation, AI, cybersecurity, antitrust, and TikTok bans.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

TikTok's lawyers were in a U.S. Court of Appeals this week trying to push back against a law that requires the popular video app to sell its American subsidiary to a non-Chinese owner or be banished from app stores. Alan Rozenshtein, an associate professor at the University of Minnesota, and expert in lawfare, explains what's at stake.

This week, Scott sat down with Lawfare team members Alan Rozenshtein, Tyler McBrien, and RatSec newbie Anastasiia "Nastya" Lapatina to talk through the week's national security headlines, including:“A Shot Across the Rubicon.” Reports indicate that President Biden and his U.K. allies may be on the verge of giving Ukraine approval to use their advanced weapons systems to strike deep into Russia, despite Russian President Vladimir Putin's threat that doing so would be seen as an act of war. How risky a move is this? “TikTok on the DokKit.” Challengers of the federal law that would ban TikTok had their (first) day in court on Tuesday in oral arguments before the D.C. Circuit. How were their criticisms received by the three-judge panel? And what will the implications of their ruling be for the law, and for TikTok more generally?“Dialing M.” Thousands of Lebanese—many of them members of the terrorist group and political movement Hezbollah—were killed or injured this week, when their pagers detonated in what many suspect was a complex terrorism operation by Israel. While some are proclaiming this to be the most accurate counter-terrorism operation in history, others are saying it was indiscriminate in its disregard for possible civilian loss of life. What should we make of this operation? And what impact will it have on the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict?For object lessons, Alan endorsed the new Vince Vaughn series Bad Monkey for finally giving the nice guy a shot. Tyler recommended the album "Manning Fireworks" by MJ Lenderman (as recently profiled in The New Yorker). Scott doubled-down on a prior Alan recommendation by encouraging folks to check out sci-fi author Ray Nayler's latest book, "The Tusks of Extinction," and the exceptional collection of short stories he's published online. And Nastya urged listeners to check out Serhii Plohky's new book, "The Russo-Ukrainian War: The Return of History."Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Scott sat down with Lawfare team members Alan Rozenshtein, Tyler McBrien, and RatSec newbie Anastasiia "Nastya" Lapatina to talk through the week's national security headlines, including:“A Shot Across the Rubicon.” Reports indicate that President Biden and his U.K. allies may be on the verge of giving Ukraine approval to use their advanced weapons systems to strike deep into Russia, despite Russian President Vladimir Putin's threat that doing so would be seen as an act of war. How risky a move is this? “TikTok on the DokKit.” Challengers of the federal law that would ban TikTok had their (first) day in court on Tuesday in oral arguments before the D.C. Circuit. How were their criticisms received by the three-judge panel? And what will the implications of their ruling be for the law, and for TikTok more generally?“Dialing M.” Thousands of Lebanese—many of them members of the terrorist group and political movement Hezbollah—were killed or injured this week, when their pagers detonated in what many suspect was a complex terrorism operation by Israel. While some are proclaiming this to be the most accurate counter-terrorism operation in history, others are saying it was indiscriminate in its disregard for possible civilian loss of life. What should we make of this operation? And what impact will it have on the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict?For object lessons, Alan endorsed the new Vince Vaughn series Bad Monkey for finally giving the nice guy a shot. Tyler recommended the album "Manning Fireworks" by MJ Lenderman (as recently profiled in The New Yorker). Scott doubled-down on a prior Alan recommendation by encouraging folks to check out sci-fi author Ray Nayler's latest book, "The Tusks of Extinction," and the exceptional collection of short stories he's published online. And Nastya urged listeners to check out Serhii Plohky's new book, "The Russo-Ukrainian War: The Return of History." Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Jane Bambauer, Professor at Levin College of Law; Ramya Krishnan, Senior Staff Attorney at the Knight First Amendment Institute and a lecturer in law at Columbia Law School; Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota Law School and a Senior Editor at Lawfare, join Kevin Frazier, Assistant Professor at St. Thomas University College of Law and a Tarbell Fellow at Lawfare, to break down the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals' hearing in TikTok v. Garland, in which a panel of judges assessed the constitutionality of the TikTok bill.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From October 28, 2022: There's been a lot of discussion about whether Donald Trump should be indicted. Lately, that discussion has focused on the documents the FBI seized from Mar-a-lago or the Jan. 6 committee's revelations about his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. But what about his speech on the ellipse on Jan. 6 when he told a crowd of thousands to “fight like hell,” and they went on to attack the Capitol? Isn't that incitement?Lawfare executive editor Natalie Orpett sat down with Alan Rozenshtein, a senior editor at Lawfare and an associate professor at the University of Minnesota Law School, and Jed Shugerman, a professor at Fordham Law School. Alan and Jed explained the complicated First Amendment jurisprudence protecting political speech, even when it leads to violence, and why they believe that given everything we know now, Trump may in fact be criminally liable. They also reference Alan and Jed's law review article in Constitutional Commentary, “January 6, Ambiguously Inciting Speech, and the Overt-Acts Solution.”To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From April 26, 2023: If someone lies about you, you can usually sue them for defamation. But what if that someone is ChatGPT? Already in Australia, the mayor of a town outside Melbourne has threatened to sue OpenAI because ChatGPT falsely named him a guilty party in a bribery scandal. Could that happen in America? Does our libel law allow that? What does it even mean for a large language model to act with "malice"? Does the First Amendment put any limits on the ability to hold these models, and the companies that make them, accountable for false statements they make? And what's the best way to deal with this problem: private lawsuits or government regulation?On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, our series on the information ecosystem, Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, discussed these questions with First Amendment expert Eugene Volokh, Professor of Law at UCLA and the author of a draft paper entitled "Large Libel Models.”Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor at the University of Minnesota Law School and Senior Editor at Lawfare, and Matt Perault, the Director of the Center on Technology Policy at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, sat down with Alexander Macgillivray, known to all as "amac," who was the former Principle Deputy Chief Technology Officer of the United States in the Biden Administration and General Counsel at Twitter.amac recently wrote a piece for Lawfare about making AI policy in a world of technological uncertainty, and Matt and Alan talked to him about how to do just that.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota Law School and Senior Editor at Lawfare, and Molly Reynolds, Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with Bridget Dooling, Assistant Professor of Law at The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law, and Nick Bednar, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota Law School, about the Supreme Court's recent decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which overruled the decades-long Chevron doctrine that required courts to defer to reasonable interpretations of their statutes.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota Law School and a Senior Editor at Lawfare; David Rubenstein, James R. Ahrens Chair in Constitutional Law and Director of the Robert J. Dole Center for Law and Government at Washburn University School of Law; and Dean Ball, Research Fellow at George Mason University's Mercatus Center, join Kevin Frazier, a Tarbell Fellow at Lawfare, to discuss a novel and wide-reaching AI bill, SB 1047, pending before the California State Assembly and AI regulation more generally.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From March 22, 2021: Benjamin Wittes sat down on Lawfare Live with Seamus Hughes, the deputy director of the Program on Extremism at George Washington University, and Alan Rozenshtein, a Lawfare senior editor and professor at the University of Minnesota Law School, to talk about the group of cases that have been filed in connection with the January 6 riot and insurrection. They talked about the database that Hughes is building and maintaining of cases, defendants and charges filed in connection with January 6; the pattern of charges; what the picture looks like so far; if it is likely to get closer to the president and his inner circle and if it will result in a series of seditious conspiracy charges.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Anupam Chander, Scott Ginsburg Professor of Law and Technology at Georgetown Law; Kyle Langvhardt, Assistant Professor at the Nebraska College of Law; and Alan Rozenshtein, Senior Editor at Lawfare and Associate Professor at Minnesota Law, join Kevin Frazier, Assistant Professor at St. Thomas University College of Law and a Tarbell Fellow at Lawfare, to discuss the Supreme Court's decision in Moody v. NetChoice. The conversation dives into the weeds of a complex opinion that includes several concurrences and a lot of open questions. You can expect many podcasts and many more law review articles breaking down the ramifications of this surprising decision.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Just months after many of the mandates in the European Union's Digital Markets Act (DMA) have gone into effect, interoperability and data portability are fresh on the policy world's mind. But what does the history of interoperability suggest about its ability to help the Internet regain its former openness?Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with Alexander Rigby, a law clerk on Delaware Court of Chancery, and Chinmayi Sharma, Associate Professor at Fordham Law School. They've just published a new white paper in Lawfare's ongoing Digital Social Contract paper series arguing that open banking is a useful case study in the promise and pitfalls of interoperability.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In foundational accounts of AI risk, the prospect of AI self-improvement looms large. The idea is simple. For any capable, goal-seeking system, the system's goal will be more readily achieved if the system first makes itself even more capable. Having become somewhat more capable, the system will be able to improve itself again. And so on, possibly generating a rapid explosion of AI capabilities, resulting in systems that humans cannot hope to control.Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with Peter Salib, who is less worried about this danger than many. Salib is an Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Houston Law Center and co-Director of the Center for Law & AI Risk. He just published a new white paper in Lawfare's ongoing Digital Social Contract paper series arguing that the same reason that it's difficult for humans to align AI systems is why AI systems themselves will hesitate to self-improve.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Today, we're bringing you an episode of Arbiters of Truth, our series on the information ecosystem.Last week the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a bill that would require ByteDance, the Chinese company that owns the popular social media app TikTok, to divest its ownership in the platform or face TikTok being banned in the United States. Although prospects for the bill in the Senate remain uncertain, President Biden has said he will sign the bill if it comes to his desk, and this is the most serious attempt yet to ban the controversial social media app.Today's podcast is the latest in a series of conversations we've had about TikTok. Matt Perault, the Director of the Center on Technology Policy at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, led a conversation with Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, and Ramya Krishnan, a Senior Staff Attorney at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University. They talked about the First Amendment implications of a TikTok ban, whether it's a good idea as a policy matter, and how we should think about foreign ownership of platforms more generally.Disclaimer: Matt's center receives funding from foundations and tech companies, including funding from TikTok.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Everyone agrees that the United States has a serious cybersecurity problem. But how to fix it—that's another question entirely. Over the past decade, a consensus has emerged across multiple administrations that NIST—the National Institute of Standards and Technology—is the right body to set cybersecurity standards for both the government and private industry. Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with Bryan Choi, who argues that this faith is misplaced. Choi is an associate professor of both law and computer science and engineering at The Ohio State University. He just published a new white paper in Lawfare's ongoing Digital Social Contract paper series exploring NIST's history in setting information technology standards and why that history should make us skeptical that NIST can fulfill the cybersecurity demands that are increasingly being placed on it.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Supreme Court heard hours and hours of oral arguments today brought by a trade association called NetChoice against laws restricting content moderation in Florida and Texas. It's the big First Amendment case of the year, and we sat through the whole oral argument.Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes spoke with Lawfare Senior Editors Quinta Jurecic and Alan Rozenshtein, and Kyle Langvardt of the University of Nebraska at Lincoln. They talked about where the justices seem to be leaning on this case, why they think the record is inadequate and underdeveloped, and why they're grumpy about it. They also talked about whether we can predict where they seem to be headed and about why this case that doesn't involve Section 230 seems to involve Section 230.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's another edition of “Trump's Trials and Tribulations,” recorded on Nov. 9 before a live audience of Lawfare Material Supporters. To talk through this week of Trump's trials, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with special guest Adam Klasfeld of The Messenger, Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower, and Lawfare Senior Editors Quinta Jurecic and Alan Rozenshtein. They talked about the Trump testimony, Ivanka's testimony, and her brother's testimony. They talked about gag orders in New York, gag orders in Washington, and what it takes to be subject to a gag order. They talked about Section 3 litigation under the 14th Amendment. And they talked about the Georgia Bureau of Investigation report on all that went down in Coffee County.This is a live conversation that happens online every Thursday at 4:00pm Eastern Time. If you would like to come join and ask a question, be sure to visit Lawfare's Patreon account and become a Material Supporter.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Artificial intelligence has massive upside potential. It could revolutionize education, science, and art, and lead to a more prosperous and equitable world. But it also carries equally massive downside risk—not just for individuals but for society and human civilization itself. How do we avail ourselves of AI's benefits while minimizing its costs?That's a question that our two guests today have thought a lot about. Tino Cuéllar is a former Stanford law professor and California supreme court justice, and he's currently the President of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Hadrien Pouget is an Associate Fellow in the Technology and International Affairs Program at Carnegie.Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare spoke with Tino and Hadrien about what lessons history can and can't teach us when it comes to regulating AI and what an international regulatory framework for this technology might look like.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The First Amendment protects speech, but what kind? True speech, sure. But what about false or misleading speech? What if it's harmful? After all, you can't yell fire in a crowded theater—or can you?To answer these questions, Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare spoke with Jeff Kosseff, who is an Associate Professor of Cybersecurity Law in the United States Naval Academy's Cyber Science Department and a Contributing Editor at Lawfare. Jeff is releasing his latest book this month, titled "Liar in a Crowded Theater: Freedom of Speech in a World of Misinformation," in which he describes, and defends, the First Amendment's robust protections for false and misleading speech.They spoke about the book, why you sometimes can yell fire in a crowded theater, and how new technology both superchargers misinformation and provides new tools to fight it.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.