The Lawfare Podcast: "Rational Security: The 'New Phone, Houthis?' Edition"

Release Date: March 27, 2025

Hosts: Scott R. Anderson, Benjamin Wittes, Roger Parloff

Overview

In this episode of The Lawfare Podcast, hosted by Scott R. Anderson alongside Benjamin Wittes and Roger Parloff, the discussion delves into three major national security and legal controversies:

1. Accidental Leak of U.S. Military Plans via Signal App
2. Legal Battle Over the Use of the Alien Enemies Act to Deport Venezuelan Gang Members
3. White House Sanctions Against Major Law Firms

Each topic is explored in depth, highlighting the complexities and implications for national security, legal frameworks, and the legal industry's integrity.

1. Accidental Leak of U.S. Military Plans via Signal App

Key Points:

• Incident Overview: Senior Trump administration officials inadvertently included Jeffrey Goldberg, Editor-in-Chief of The Atlantic, in a Secret Signal group chat discussing detailed plans for airstrikes in Yemen against the Houthis.
• Consequences: Goldberg gained access to sensitive operational details, which were subsequently made public by The Atlantic, challenging the administration's assertion that no classified information was shared.
• Administration's Defense: Officials claimed that the information shared was not classified, a stance widely criticized by the hosts and guests for being disingenuous.

Notable Quotes:

• Scott R. Anderson (00:00-00:32): "The following podcast contains advertising to access an ad-free version of the Lawfare Podcast..."

  (Note: This quote is part of the advertisement section and should be excluded from the summary as per instructions.)

• Benjamin Wittes (05:22-05:45):

  "Hello, everyone, and welcome back to Rational Security. I am your host, Scott R. Anderson. Thrilled to be back with you for what may be the best week of Rational Security news and topics I have ever encountered in multiple years of doing this show."

• Scott R. Anderson (08:42-13:42):

  "The administration decided to have a military operation against the Houthis... And as the listeners probably know by this point, Jeff initially thought this was some kind of fishing expedition and mistake or a hoax."

• Benjamin Wittes (14:09-15:19):

  "The classification level doesn't automatically slap on because it relates to military operational details. Sure, but the point here is when you hear the administration talk about how this wasn't highly classified, I think it's important to bear in mind that that's not the threshold as to whether this was a responsible thing to share or not."

Discussion Highlights:

• Responsibility and Classification: The hosts debate the administration's claim that no classified information was shared, emphasizing that operational details, regardless of classification, should not be disseminated irresponsibly.
• Potential Risks: The accidental inclusion of a journalist in the group chat posed significant risks, such as the possibility of sensitive information falling into adversarial hands.
• Administration's Consistency: The internal conversations revealed a disconnect between the administration's public stance and private communications, particularly regarding relations with European allies.

Insights:

• Media Handling: Jeffrey Goldberg's responsible handling of the leaked information stands in stark contrast to the administration's attempts to discredit him.
• Policy Implications: The incident underscores the dangers of lax information security within high-level government communications and the broader implications for U.S. foreign policy and military operations.

2. Legal Battle Over the Use of the Alien Enemies Act to Deport Venezuelan Gang Members

Key Points:

• Government Action: The Trump administration attempted to deport alleged members of the Venezuelan gang Trenda Aragua (TDA) using the Alien Enemies Act, a statute rarely invoked since World War II.
• Judicial Response: A federal judge issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) halting the deportations, criticizing the administration's broad and unclear application of the Act.
• State Secrets Privilege: The administration invoked the state secrets privilege to prevent the disclosure of details related to the deportation plans, complicating legal challenges.

Notable Quotes:

• Roger Parloff (43:15-45:49):

  "The proclamation invokes the Alien Enemies Act. And the Alien Enemies Act, which has been used only previously during declared wars, does by its terms permit its use... But there's a lot that didn't happen as a result of that. Is that a fair summary, Scott?"

• Benjamin Wittes (52:49-59:55):

  "This has become such an... a mess of insane legal issues in this one case. If you are a law student, take a look at this case, you could take any slice of it and write a whole article off of the crazy arguments being advanced."

Discussion Highlights:

• Legal Justifications: The administration's use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport members of a non-state criminal gang drew significant legal scrutiny, questioning the statute's applicability.
• Judicial Concerns: Courts expressed doubts about TDA being classified as a foreign enemy under the Act, especially in the absence of clear ties to a foreign government.
• Due Process Violations: The expedited removal process bypassed standard immigration proceedings, raising concerns about due process rights for the affected individuals.

Insights:

• Executive Overreach: The attempt to use the Alien Enemies Act in this context is viewed as a stretch of executive power, lacking solid legal grounding and undermining the statute's intended use.
• Impact on Rule of Law: The aggressive legal maneuvers highlight potential threats to the rule of law and set concerning precedents for future executive actions.

3. White House Sanctions Against Major Law Firms

Key Points:

• Targeted Firms: The White House imposed sanctions on prominent law firms, including Paul Weiss, Covington & Burling, Perkins Coie, and Jenner & Block, due to their involvement in prosecuting or defending President Trump.
• Nature of Sanctions: Restrictions include barring these firms from federal buildings, denying them security clearances, and limiting their ability to secure government contracts.
• Industry Impact: The sanctions aim to pressure these firms financially and reputationally, potentially deterring them from representing certain clients or pursuing legal challenges against the administration.

Notable Quotes:

• Roger Parloff (72:56-81:43):

  "These are very wealthy people. Why should we care? You should care because their pro bono work is vital to the country..."

• Benjamin Wittes (83:03-88:13):

  "This is something that could launch an army of student law review notes... I am not super optimistic about any of them on the government's behalf, but we'll see where they land."

Discussion Highlights:

• Legal and Ethical Concerns: The sanctions raise significant First Amendment and Due Process issues, challenging the separation of powers and potential government overreach.
• Industry Reaction: While some firms, like Paul Weiss, capitulated by agreeing to certain principles, others like Perkins Coie actively pursued legal challenges against the sanctions.
• Long-Term Consequences: The actions undermine the independence of the legal profession, potentially deterring firms from engaging in pro bono work or representing clients against the administration.

Insights:

• Repression of Legal Dissent: The targeting of law firms appears to be a strategy to intimidate legal professionals and discourage challenges to executive actions.
• Chilling Effect: These sanctions could have a chilling effect on the legal industry's willingness to take on controversial cases, threatening the balance of power and the protection of civil liberties.

Conclusion

In this episode, The Lawfare Podcast provides a critical examination of significant events impacting national security and the legal landscape. The accidental leak of military plans underscores the importance of secure communication in government operations. The legal battle over the Alien Enemies Act highlights tensions between executive power and judicial oversight, raising concerns about due process and the rule of law. The unprecedented sanctions against major law firms reveal a troubling trend of government intimidation aimed at suppressing legal dissent and undermining the independence of the legal profession.

Key Takeaways:

• Information Security: Rigorous protocols are essential to prevent accidental leaks of sensitive information that can compromise national security.
• Legal Boundaries: Executive actions must adhere to established legal frameworks to preserve the integrity of the judicial system and protect individual rights.
• Rule of Law: The independence of legal professionals is crucial for maintaining checks and balances within the government, and any attempts to undermine this independence pose significant threats to democracy.

Notable Quotes with Timestamps:

• Benjamin Wittes (05:22):

  "Hello, everyone, and welcome back to Rational Security..."

• Scott R. Anderson (08:42):

  "The administration decided to have a military operation against the Houthis..."

• Benjamin Wittes (14:09):

  "The classification level doesn't automatically slap on because it relates to military operational details..."

• Roger Parloff (43:15):

  "The proclamation invokes the Alien Enemies Act..."

• Scott R. Anderson (59:55):

  "What do you get out of it? At most, you sneak two or three planes across the border..."

• Benjamin Wittes (83:03):

  "It's a really remarkable set of actions..."

Final Thoughts

This episode serves as a comprehensive analysis of pivotal issues at the intersection of national security, law, and policy. By dissecting these events, The Lawfare Podcast offers listeners an informed perspective on the challenges facing the United States in maintaining security while upholding legal and ethical standards.

For more insights and detailed discussions, visit Lawfare Blog and explore other podcast series such as Rational Security, Chatter, Lawfare No Bull, and The Aftermath.

Support The Lawfare Podcast

Become a material supporter to access ad-free content and enjoy other special benefits. Visit Lawfare on Patreon to contribute.