The Lawfare Podcast: Rational Security – “Just Chilling in My Padded Room” Edition

Date: January 22, 2026
Host: Scott R. Anderson
Guests: Shane Harris (The Atlantic), Anna Bauer (Lawfare Senior Editor & Trial Correspondent), Lauren Voss (Lawfare Public Service Fellow)

Episode Overview

This episode dives into three major national security and legal controversies of the week:

1. Minnesota “ICE” Standoff: DOJ subpoenas against Minnesota officials amid aggressive immigration enforcement, and the legal and political stakes regarding potential Insurrection Act deployment.
2. Federal Reserve Probes: The Justice Department investigates Fed Chairman Powell, intersecting with Supreme Court arguments about the President’s power to remove Federal Reserve board members.
3. Havana Syndrome Breakthrough?: The US government reportedly acquires a device similar to those speculated to cause Havana Syndrome, reigniting debate about its origins and geopolitical implications.

The hosts explore the legal intricacies, political context, inter-branch power struggles, and the broader implications for US governance and national security.

1. Banter & Introduction (01:46 – 05:39)

Sound Bunker, Padded Rooms, and Setting the Tone

• Topic: Shane’s home sound booth (dubbed “padded room”), setting a slightly irreverent but earnest and analytical tone.
• Key Quote:
  • “It reminds me a little bit of a padded room.” – Shane Harris (02:25)
  • “Which we need these days. It’s a healthy…” – Scott R. Anderson (02:27)

Team Introductions

• Shane Harris: Former host, now at The Atlantic.
• Lauren Voss: Lawfare’s Public Service Fellow, recently returned from family leave.
• Anna Bauer: Lawfare’s senior editor and trial correspondent.

2. Minnesota “Nice” (ICE) Showdown (05:39 – 32:38)

DOJ Subpoenas & State-Federal Confrontation

Context

• Aggressive ICE tactics in Minnesota, especially in Minneapolis, inciting unrest.
• DOJ issues subpoenas to prominent Democrats (Governor Walz, Mayor Frey) following allegations they’re obstructing federal immigration enforcement.
• Fears President Trump may invoke the Insurrection Act and deploy federal troops.

Legal and Policy Issues

• State AG Keith Ellison’s legal challenge, citing unlawful federal overreach.

• Pretextual nature of the investigation:
  “What are they doing here? The conduct here...truly just seems baseless.”
  – Anna Bauer (10:30)

• Justice Department may be leveraging investigations as retaliation or intimidation, with little genuine criminal predicate.

Political Strategy & Insurrection Act

• “Donald Trump has a fixation on the state of Minnesota...I think it is, it seems to me to be a pretty obvious case of him trying to intimidate state officials and make it look like they’re the ones who can’t control their state, which potentially creates a pretext for the Insurrection Act.”
  – Shane Harris (13:04)

• Speculation about preparation of troops for Minnesota deployment; doubts about public support for military action against American protestors.

Enforcement & Grand Jury Dynamics

• State grand juries make politically motivated prosecutions unlikely:
  “Here that grand jury will be a grand jury that sits in the very city where federal officials are, you know, beating up people…” – Anna Bauer (15:31)

DOJ Pressure Tactics

• Coercive subpoenas may intend to chill local resistance to ICE.
• “Burn bag” approach: Use of investigations more as a “cudgel” than real criminal pursuit (17:18, Scott R. Anderson).

Supreme Court Ruling & Federal Troop Deployments

• Recent SCOTUS decision limits the President’s use of National Guard troops under 10 USC 12406, increasing focus on the Insurrection Act for domestic deployments.

Implications and Scenarios

• Lauren Voss outlines how aggressive DHS/ICE action may be deliberately provoking conditions to justify military intervention:
  “It seems like this is an on purpose trying to escalate the situation right now...waiting for that to foment into protest and unrest.” – Lauren Voss (21:36)
• Potential military roles: not just riot control, but immigration enforcement and even “tracking down” agitators, raising civil liberties concerns.
• “The military isn’t trained in this. This isn’t things they normally do.” – Lauren Voss (24:45)
• Recruitment and morale risks: deploying military against immigrant communities could harm force cohesion (26:40, Shane Harris; 27:49, Lauren Voss).

Judicial Deference

• Lauren addresses the likely high judicial deference if the Insurrection Act is invoked:
  “As the statute’s written...I’m not optimistic that there would be a lot of oversight here.” – Lauren Voss (32:38)

3. Federal Reserve: Politics and Prosecution (36:26 – 56:11)

Criminal Probe into Fed Chairman Powell

• DOJ issues subpoenas to Powell over congressional testimony related to Fed HQ renovation costs—called by some “laughably” baseless.
• Intersection with the Supreme Court’s Lisa Cook case: presidential authority to remove Fed board members.

Legal and Political Ramifications

• Anna calls the criminal referral “ridiculous” and illustrative of the increasingly “ludicrous” pretexts for politicized DOJ probes.
• Symbolic escalation: Powell’s public statement defending Fed independence, attendance at Lisa Cook’s SCOTUS argument.
• “What’s at stake...it actually doesn’t really matter if they’re bad at doing a criminal investigation...as long as you have a pretext that the President can articulate, that’s enough.” – Anna Bauer (45:02; 45:35)

Internal White House Chaos

• Shane notes lack of strategy and discord in Trump administration’s coordination:
  “It just seems like this was a massive whiff...” – Shane Harris (49:29)
  “This chaos machine...the top has come off the blender and it’s just splattering food all over the kitchen.” – Shane Harris (51:21)

• Lauren Voss cautions that even if much is ineffective, some radical policy shifts have been successful and the accumulation is “monumental”(52:47).

4. Havana Syndrome: Devices and Doubts (57:47 – 77:47)

Bombshell: US Acquires Possible Attacking Device

• Recent reporting: DHS acquires a backpack-sized device—possibly similar to those theorized to cause anomalous health incidents (Havana Syndrome).
• The device reportedly has “Russian components,” but this detail is murky.

Renewed Controversy

• The existence of a candidate device undermines the CIA’s previous confident public assessment:
  “If you go back...the intelligence community...found no evidence that anyone had built a device that was capable of doing this kind of damage...Now, the other thing...that opinion began to change in the White House in the final days of the Biden administration.”
  – Shane Harris (58:55)

Intelligence Community Split

• CIA has been more skeptical of the weapon theory, partly due to lack of signals intelligence.
• DoD, by contrast, has always “been a bit more inclined to think there may be something deliberate.”
• The DHS acquisition of a device reframes the debate, raising stakes for both US policymakers and affected personnel.
• “I don’t think I’ve ever seen...a document or group of analysts so confident, so declarative in their finding of, like, no, it’s not a weapon, period.” – Shane Harris (69:51)

Politics and Policy

• “Havana Syndrome...has just been something that multiple administrations have kind of tried to avoid...What are you going to do about it? Right?” – Shane Harris (74:20)

• Official US reluctance to publicly attribute incidents to a foreign government relates to the fear of escalation with Russia.

5. Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the DOJ’s Subpoenas in Minnesota:
  “I just look at this and think, what are they doing here? The conduct here in terms of investigating these state officials truly just seems baseless.”
  – Anna Bauer (10:30)

• On Military Deployment Risks:
  “There’s a real damage he could do to just...the willingness of people to do this job and to sign up to serve in the future, if this is what we’re asking them to do.”
  – Shane Harris (26:40)

• On the Politicization of Prosecutions:
  “As long as you have a pretext that the President can articulate, that’s enough. And that courts can’t review that decision.”
  – Anna Bauer (45:35)

• On the Trump Administration:
  “It’s like the top has come off the blender and it’s just splattering food all over the kitchen or something.”
  – Shane Harris (51:21)

• On the “Device” Acquired:
  “If you find out that the Russians are running around...giving people brain damage...there has to be some response to that.”
  – Shane Harris (74:20)

6. Timestamps for Key Segments

• Introduction & Banter: 01:46 – 05:39
• Minnesota “Nice” Discussion: 05:39 – 32:38
  • DOJ actions: 10:30 – 17:18
  • Insurrection Act/SCOTUS: 17:18 – 32:38
• Federal Reserve Probe & Supreme Court: 36:26 – 56:11
• Havana Syndrome Segment: 57:47 – 77:46
• Quotes & Critical Analysis Scattered: See notable quotes above
• Closing & Object Lessons: 77:47 – End

7. Object Lessons & Lighthearted Recommendations

Each host closed with a personal recommendation—streaming shows, parenting gadgets, or quirky kids’ programming.

• Anna: Season 2 of The Night Manager (78:18)
• Lauren: The Snoo (baby-smart bassinet) (79:43)
• Scott: “Grizzy and the Lemmings” (quirky French-Canadian kids comedy) (81:49)
• Shane: Man on the Inside (Ted Danson show, spy-retirement home comedy) (84:36)

8. Summary Takeaways

• Federal law enforcement’s escalation in Minnesota is widely regarded as a political maneuver pretextual for further executive power grabs, with profound legal, civil, and military implications.
• The Justice Department’s probe of the Federal Reserve leadership illustrates the risks of politicizing independent government functions, highlighting new urgency for judicial limits on executive removal powers.
• The US government’s acquisition of a device possibly linked to “Havana Syndrome” undermines previous intelligence skepticism, reopening policy dilemmas about attribution, response, and the limits of interagency trust.
• Across topics, the Trump administration’s tactics are painted as erratic, sometimes incompetent, but cumulatively effective in shifting institutional norms, with potential lasting damage for US systems of law and governance.

This episode balances humor with a sober, nuanced breakdown of headline national security controversies, reflecting the Rational Security and Lawfare tradition of serious, accessible analysis.

End of Summary