Podcast appearances and mentions of ashley deeks

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Benjamin Wittes and Natalie Orpett, and University of Virginia School of Law professor Ashley Deeks, to talk through the week's big national security news, including:“Bracing for Fallout.” In a surprise move, President Trump joined Israel's military campaign against Iran over the weekend, using a specialized U.S. ordinance to hit Iranian nuclear sites that were beyond Israel's early reach. It's unclear to what extent the attack set back Iran's nuclear ambitions, and debates continue to rage whether the president's actions were wise or legal. But it did trigger an Iranian response against U.S. military bases in the Persian Gulf — action that was shortly followed by a tentative U.S.-backed ceasefire between Iran and Israel. What best explains the president's decision to join the military campaign? And what will the consequences be, both in the region and back home in the United States?“Destinations Unknown.” In a short, unexplained opinion in the matter of DHS v. DVD this past week, the Supreme Court stayed a lower court preliminary injunction that had barred the Trump administration from removing immigrants to third countries with minimal procedural protections against threats of torture and other mistreatment. But the exact ramifications of this holding are unclear, as the Justice Department has now returned to the Court asking for clarification as to whether its ruling also invalidates a later order applying the class-wide prohibition in the initial preliminary injunction to a specific group of individuals. What explains the Supreme Court's odd approach in this case? And what could its broader ramifications be for the Trump administration's immigration agenda?“‘Bove the Law.” A now-public internal Justice Department whistleblower report alleges that Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General—and current Third Circuit nominee—Emil Bove endorsed plans to disregard judicial orders that would have obstructed the removal of foreign nationals in directing the Department of Homeland Security that it did not need to return certain deportation flights already in the air after a judge directed as much from the bench. How serious a transgression has Bove committed if these allegations are true? And what impact will they have on his Third Circuit confirmation?In object lessons, forget day-of-the-week underpants (or pronghorn shirts)! Ben spurs on a need for more day-of-the-week monsters with the last weather report you'll ever need. Natalie is escaping, not just from reality but also from the heat, with her local bookstore, East City Bookshop. Scott shared the heartbreaking news that The Atlantic is stealing yet another Rational Security co-host emeritus as our beloved Quinta Jurecic begins her next crazy venture beneath the skies (Quinta, we miss you already!). And Ashley, channeling our bereavement at Quinta's departure, recommends Alone on the History Channel.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 Benjamin Wittes and Natalie Orpett, and University of Virginia School of Law professor Ashley Deeks, to talk through the week's big national security news, including:“Bracing for Fallout.” In a surprise move, President Trump joined Israel's military campaign against Iran over the weekend, using a specialized U.S. ordinance to hit Iranian nuclear sites that were beyond Israel's early reach. It's unclear to what extent the attack set back Iran's nuclear ambitions, and debates continue to rage whether the president's actions were wise or legal. But it did trigger an Iranian response against U.S. military bases in the Persian Gulf — action that was shortly followed by a tentative U.S.-backed ceasefire between Iran and Israel. What best explains the president's decision to join the military campaign? And what will the consequences be, both in the region and back home in the United States?“Destinations Unknown.” In a short, unexplained opinion in the matter of DHS v. DVD this past week, the Supreme Court stayed a lower court preliminary injunction that had barred the Trump administration from removing immigrants to third countries with minimal procedural protections against threats of torture and other mistreatment. But the exact ramifications of this holding are unclear, as the Justice Department has now returned to the Court asking for clarification as to whether its ruling also invalidates a later order applying the class-wide prohibition in the initial preliminary injunction to a specific group of individuals. What explains the Supreme Court's odd approach in this case? And what could its broader ramifications be for the Trump administration's immigration agenda?“‘Bove the Law.” A now-public internal Justice Department whistleblower report alleges that Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General—and current Third Circuit nominee—Emil Bove endorsed plans to disregard judicial orders that would have obstructed the removal of foreign nationals in directing the Department of Homeland Security that it did not need to return certain deportation flights already in the air after a judge directed as much from the bench. How serious a transgression has Bove committed if these allegations are true? And what impact will they have on his Third Circuit confirmation?In object lessons, forget day-of-the-week underpants (or pronghorn shirts)! Ben spurs on a need for more day-of-the-week monsters with the last weather report you'll ever need. Natalie is escaping, not just from reality but also from the heat, with her local bookstore, East City Bookshop. Scott shared the heartbreaking news that The Atlantic is stealing yet another Rational Security co-host emeritus as our beloved Quinta Jurecic begins her next crazy venture beneath the skies (Quinta, we miss you already!). And Ashley, channeling our bereavement at Quinta's departure, recommends Alone on the History Channel.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.

For today's episode, Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Ashley Deeks, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, and Kristen Eichensehr, also a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, but currently a visiting professor at Harvard Law School, to discuss their forthcoming law review article, “Frictionless Government and Foreign Relations,” which focuses on the dangers that can arise in moments where there appears to be broad consensus on a particular set of policies.They discussed what constitutes frictionless government, where it might exist on the present policy terrain, the risks such circumstances can entail, and strategies policymakers can embrace for managing them.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 episode features Maj Fabiani Duarte, Associate Professor in the National Security Law Department at The Judge Advocate General's Legal Center and School, interviewing Ashley Deeks, UVA Law School Professor and recent White House associate counsel and deputy legal adviser to the National Security Council. In this episode, Professor Deeks discusses Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the military and the U.S. Executive branch with Maj Duarte. They also discuss Professor Deeks' forthcoming publication, The Double Black Box: National Security, Artificial Intelligence, and the Struggle for Democratic Accountability which discusses the increasing reliance on AI by Executive branch agencies like the Department of Defense and CIA and how to hold the Executive branch accountable for the use of AI tools and machine-learning (ML) systems in high-risk national security settings. The “double black box” problem that Professor Deeks identifies is the customary secrecy of much of the business of the Executive branch, coupled with the opaque nature of AI/ML tools themselves, significantly complicating democratic oversight and accountability. Professor Deeks presents several potential solutions to help better govern AI tools employed by the U.S. government and also weighs in on the global AI agreements. The discussion also delves into Professor Deeks' career working for the National Security Council, the State Department, and her current work as a law professor. Connect with The Judge Advocate General's Legal Center and School by visiting our website at https://tjaglcs.army.mil/ or on Facebook (tjaglcs), Instagram (tjaglcs), or LinkedIn (school/tjaglcs).

Ashley Deeks, Professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, and Dr. Mark Klamberg, Professor at Stockholm University, Visiting Professor at American University, and Fellow with the Atlantic Council, join Lawfare's Tarbell Fellow Kevin Frazier and Senior Editor Alan Rozenshtein to discuss the weaponization of AI. The group explores a number of related topics including ongoing domestic and international efforts to regulate military use of AI, the national security implications of weaponized AI, and whether AI companies bear any legal responsibility for military use of their AI systems. Professor Deeks and Dr. Klamberg bring their extensive AI knowledge to the fore in this illuminating podcast. Keep an eye out for their respective forthcoming publications on military use of AI.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 January 6, 2020: On Friday, the Lawfare Podcast hosted a conversation on the wide-ranging policy implications of the U.S. strike that killed Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps' leader Qassem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Mohandes, deputy commander of Iraq's quasi-official Popular Mobilization Forces and leader of the Iraqi militia and PMF Keta'ib Hezbollah.Today's special edition episode leaves the policy debate behind to zero-in on the law behind the strike. Law of war and international law experts Scott R. Anderson, Bobby Chesney, Jack Goldsmith, Ashley Deeks and Samuel Moyn join Benjamin Wittes to discuss the domestic and international law surrounding the strike, how the administration might legally justify it, what the president might do next and how Congress might respond.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

States are increasingly turning to artificial intelligence systems to enhance their national security decision-making. The real risks that states will deploy unlawful or unreliable national security AI make international regulations seem appealing, but what's the right model for them?Ashley Deeks is the Class of 1948 Professor of Scholarly Research in Law at the University of Virginia Law School. She's just published a paper for Laware's ongoing Digital Social Contract research paper series, in which she argues that, instead of looking to nuclear arms control as the model for national security AI regulation, states should look to how cyber operations are regulated. Lawfare Senior Editor Alan Rozenshtein spoke with Ashley about her research and what a successful regulatory regime for national security AI would look like.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Rational Security, Alan Rozenshtein, Quinta Jurecic, and Scott R. Anderson were joined by beloved Lawfare contributor and UVA Law professor Ashley Deeks, fresh from her latest stint at the White House. They hashed through some of the week's big national security news, including:“The Bridge and Pummel Crowd.” Ukraine's destruction of a symbolic bridge linking Russia to Crimea has observers worried about a new round of escalation, as Russia responded with missile strikes on a range of civilian targets across the country, including a German consulate in Kyiv, with promises of more to come. Are we entering a new, brutal phase of the conflict? What can be done to stop its civilian toll—or to keep the escalatory spiral from spinning out of control?“Finally, Some Decency and Moderation on the Supreme Court.” Last week, the Supreme Court took up not one but two—albeit, two closely related—cases that center on how to apply Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a law that provides internet companies with immunity for liability arising from user-generated content they host and protects their ability to moderate content. What might this judicial scrutiny mean for the future of content moderation on the internet?“1,001 Arabian Slights.” Saudi Arabia's decision to cut oil production—a move expected to drive up oil prices and slow the global economy, to the benefit of Russia and other producers—has some members of Congress up in arms. This is especially true as it came on the end of a summer visit by President Biden that controversially seemed to signal a willingness to thaw relations with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, which have grown icy since his involvement in the 2018 killing of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. What do these steps mean for the future of the U.S.-Saudi relationship?Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Alan, Quinta, and Scott were joined by beloved Lawfare contributor and UVA Law professor Ashley Deeks, fresh from her latest stint at the White House. They hashed through some of the week's big national security news, including:“The Bridge and Pummel Crowd.” Ukraine's destruction of a symbolic bridge linking Russia to Crimea has observers worried about a new round of escalation, as Russia responded with missile strikes on a range of civilian targets across the country, including a German consulate in Kyiv, with promises of more to come. Are we entering a new, brutal phase of the conflict? What can be done to stop its civilian toll—or to keep the escalatory spiral from spinning out of control?“Finally, Some Decency and Moderation on the Supreme Court.” Last week, the Supreme Court took up not one but two—albeit, two closely related—cases that center on how to apply Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a law that provides internet companies with immunity for liability arising from user-generated content they host and protects their ability to moderate content. What might this judicial scrutiny mean for the future of content moderation on the internet?“1,001 Arabian Slights.” Saudi Arabia's decision to cut oil production—a move expected to drive up oil prices and slow the global economy, to the benefit of Russia and other producers—has some members of Congress up in arms. This is especially true as it came on the end of a summer visit by President Biden that controversially seemed to signal a willingness to thaw relations with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, which have grown icy since his involvement in the 2018 killing of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. What do these steps mean for the future of the U.S.-Saudi relationship?For object lessons, Alan shared his wife's love for ch-ch-ch-chia pets. Quinta shared a story of voter fraud and corruption in one of America's greatest institutions: NPS's Fat Bear Week competition. Scott shared his joyfully music-filled week and urged listeners to check out his favorite album of all time, celebrating its 20th anniversary. And Ashley passed along a revealing story about the fake Vermeer discovered at the National Gallery of Art. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence has said, “the development of AI will shape the future of power.” AI is coming and coming hard. The meaningful application of law and ethics will help determine whether we maximize the opportunities and minimize and mitigate the risks. Law and ethics will, or could and should, distinguish democratic and American AI from authoritarian applications of AI. Law and ethics will bind like-minded alliances in the AI field and it will help to build and sustain public trust and support for appropriate AI applications. The converse is also likely. If, for example, the public does not trust the government’s use of AI because of certain facial recognition applications, it may not trust the government with using AI to facilitate contact tracing amidst a pandemic. This session will consider the ethical use of AI in national security decision-making including: (1) The use of predictive algorithms; (2) Potential AI decision-making redlines and permits; and (3) What is it national security lawyers should know and should ask about AI before it is used to inform and execute national security decisions. Corin Stone is a Scholar-in-Residence at American University's Washington College of Law: https://www.wcl.american.edu/community/faculty/profile/cstone/bio Hon. James E. Baker is the Director of the Institute of Security Policy and Law at Syracuse University: http://law.syr.edu/profile/the-hon.-james-e.-baker References: - James E. Baker, The Centaur's Dilemma: National Security Law for the Coming AI Revolution. Brookings Institution Press, 2020. Introduction: https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/law_national_security/centaurs-dilemma-introduction.pdf Chapter 10: https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/law_national_security/centaurs-dilemma-chapter-10.pdf - Department of National Intelligence, "Artificial Intelligence Ethics Framework for the Intelligence Community." June, 2020. https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/AI_Ethics_Framework_for_the_Intelligence_Community_10.pdf - Ashley Deeks, “Predicting Enemies,” 104 Virginia Law Review 1529 (2018). https://www.virginialawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/104VaLRev-2.pdf - Department of Defense Ethical Principles for Artificial Intelligence: https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Releases/Release/Article/2091996/dod-adopts-ethical-principles-for-artificial-intelligence/ -ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct and Comments: https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/law_national_security/model-rules-ai-webinar.pdf - "Principled Artificial Intelligence – Mapping Consensus in Ethical and Rights-Based Approaches to Principles for AI." Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University. Jan. 2020: https://cyber.harvard.edu/publication/2020/principled-ai

UVA Law professor Ashley Deeks; Charles Flint, chief of staff to U.S. Sen. Marsha Blackburn; and Sarah M. Harris of the law firm Williams & Connolly discuss whether Chinese-owned tech companies like TikTok pose a threat to national security and how the government should respond. The event was sponsored by the Federalist Society chapter at UVA Law. (University of Virginia School of Law, Sept. 29, 2020)

In recent years, Congress has taken unprecedented steps to push back against the Trump administration's efforts to pull U.S. troops from certain long-standing deployments overseas. The most recent such provision is contained in the House version of the National Defense Authorization Act for 2021 that is currently being debated and would prohibit the president from reducing U.S. troop levels in Germany and Europe unless certain conditions are met. But does Congress have the authority to direct these deployments, or does doing so interfere with the president's constitutional authority as commander-in-chief? To discuss these issues, Scott R. Anderson sat down with two legal experts who have written extensively on the subject: Ashley Deeks of the University of Virginia School of Law and Zachary Price of the UC Hastings College of Law. They discussed the legal limits on Congress's authority over the military, what the president's commander-in-chief authority actually entails and what it all means for the future of U.S. troop deployments overseas.

A conversation with Prof. Ashley Deeks of the University of Virginia School of Law - Deeks explains how AI and machine learning may implicate the laws of war, from assisting states in decisions on the use of force and self-defense, to increasing compliance with the law of armed conflict on the battlefield, and even the coding of the IHL rules and principles into the AI systems operating or interfacing with weapons systems.

UVA Law professor Ashley Deeks discusses how contemporary advancements in machine learning could impact developments in international law. This presentation was hosted by the Virginia Journal of International Law. (University of Virginia School of Law, Feb. 4, 2020)

On Friday, the Lawfare Podcast hosted a conversation on the wide-ranging policy implications of the U.S. strike that killed Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps leader Qassem Soleimani and militia leader Abu Mahdi al-Mohandes, deputy commander of Iraq’s quasi-official Popular Mobilization Forces and leader of the Iraqi militia and PMF Keta’ib Hezbollah.  Today’s special edition episode leaves the policy debate behind to zero-in on the law behind the strike. Law of war and international law experts Scott R. Anderson, Bobby Chesney, Jack Goldsmith, Ashley Deeks and Samuel Moyn join Benjamin Wittes to discuss the domestic and international law surrounding the strike, how the administration might legally justify it, what the president might do next and how Congress might respond. 

As tech transforms traditional warfare, UVA Law professor Ashley Deeks explains how national security is changing and discusses whether the law can keep up.

Professor Kenneth Anderson of the Washington College of Law at American University moderates a panel on the 2016 Obama administration report on the legal frameworks guiding the U.S. use of military force and related national security operations. The Jus ad Bellum conference panel includes professor Bobby Chesney of the University of Texas School of Law, UVA Law professor Ashley Deeks, and Rita Siemion, legal counsel at Human Rights First. (University of Virginia School of Law, March 22, 2018)

Professor Ashley S. Deeks discusses President Obama's use of war powers, examines his approach to international law and compares his legacy with that of the Bush Administration. (University of Virginia School of Law, November 4, 2016)

In the her fall National Security Law class, Professor Ashley Deeks discusses military targets and the use of drones, along with other national security law issues. Deeks previously served as the assistant legal adviser for political-military affairs in the U.S. Department of State’s Office of the Legal Adviser, and as the embassy legal adviser at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad, during Iraq’s constitutional negotiations. (University of Virginia School of Law, Dec. 2, 2015) Watch the video: http://bit.ly/1Q5OApM

Ashley Deeks speaks at MILOPS on the Unwilling or Unable test.