The Lawfare Podcast:

Rational Security: “The Story of Three Warrants” Edition

Date: February 5, 2026
Host: Scott R. Anders
Guests: Molly Roberts (Lawfare Senior Editor), Mike Fiemer (Lawfare Senior Editor), Troy Edwards (Lawfare Public Service Fellow, former federal prosecutor)

EPISODE OVERVIEW

This episode dives deep into three high-profile, controversial uses of legal warrants from the past week. The hosts break down the evolving storylines, legal underpinnings, policy questions, and institutional risks of each case, with particular focus on developments that blend law, national security, and controversial executive actions. The episode maintains Lawfare’s trademark substantive and slightly wry tone in exploring stories involving the 2020 election in Georgia, ICE administrative warrants, and the search and seizure involving a prominent journalist.

KEY TOPICS & DISCUSSION POINTS

I. The Georgia Election Center Search: Unusual Warrant Execution

[04:11–41:54]

Story Recap

• The FBI executed a search warrant at the Fulton County (Georgia) election center.
• DNI Tulsi Gabbard, at the behest of President Trump, was present—a highly unorthodox move.
• Seizure included ballot boxes and election materials tied to 2020 election.
• Ongoing legal disputes: State officials are suing to recover seized materials.

Legal Underpinnings

• Statutes Invoked: 52 USC 20701 (ballot retention), 52 USC 20511 (election fraud).
  • Discussion on statutes of limitations: Normally 5 years, but retention rules could extend this window ([10:41], Troy Edwards).
  • Conspiracy or RICO could potentially pull other actions inside the statute limitations window ([13:06], [17:45], Mike Fiemer).
• Search Warrant Technicalities: Debate over what must be included in the warrant’s attachment, and what’s left open for later prosecution (e.g., conspiracy not named in the warrant is still investigable) ([13:41], Troy Edwards).

Impact of the DNI’s Presence

• Norm Violations:
  • Scott: “How weird is this?”—Unheard of and presents major chain-of-custody and evidence contamination risks ([20:07], Mike Fiemer).
  • Potential exposure of classified material, chain-of-custody concerns, and making the DNI a possible witness in court ([21:16], Mike Fiemer).
• Legal Justifications Questioned:
  • Tulsi Gabbard's public defense—citing executive orders and an MoU between ODNI and FBI—was described as incoherent and irrelevant ([26:22], Mike Fiemer: “She’s mixing apples and coffee mugs. It doesn’t really make a lot of sense.”).
  • Scott: “There’s a lot of stuff being thrown against the wall in this letter, which is not an uncommon obfuscatory tactic…” ([27:32]).

Federal vs. State Authority

• The constitutional principle puts elections in state hands, but the Executive is pushing federal involvement or “nationalizing” in up to 15 locations ([30:14]–[37:58]).
• Troy Edwards explains both the lighter “give us our ballots back” approach and the heavier 10th Amendment argument as legal pushback from Georgia ([30:14], Troy Edwards).

Political and Institutional Fallout

• Administration seems reactive to the president’s whims, leading to “strangely shooting itself in the foot” ([35:24], Scott).
• Molly Roberts: The "fifteen places" suggests they already have a target list. She finds the episode chilling and potentially a test run for future action ([38:40], Molly).
• Troy Edwards: “It’s just another example of the damage to each of the institutions involved… It’s significant damage to each of the institutions involved and allows some of the American public to shrug their shoulders and say...these are the things that happen…” ([40:43]).

II. ICE’s Use of Administrative Warrants

[46:31–60:49]

Background

• Internal ICE memos instruct that agents can use administrative (not judicial) warrants to detain/search homes of those suspected to be undocumented—previously limited to obtaining documents, not entry/seizure.

Legal and Policy Analysis

• Tradition: Administrative warrants are rare, generally for collecting records (FBI: child crimes, health care fraud; Secret Service: presidential threats), not residential searches ([47:10], Mike Fiemer).
• Norm Violation: No precedent for using administrative warrants to justify ICE home entry—“this seems like a pretty clear cut violation of the Fourth Amendment to me” ([47:10], Mike Fiemer).

Possible DHS/ICE Reasoning

• Troy Edwards: Efficiency is the likely driver, with little obvious scope for direct judicial challenge or financial consequence owing to limited Bivens liability ([51:15], [53:24]).
• The legal argument may hinge on disputed dicta from a 1960 Supreme Court case—recent lower courts split on its meaning ([53:59], Troy).

Prospects for Pushback

• Plaintiff lawsuits for injunctions possible, but enforcement is inconsistent.
• Molly Roberts: Not clear-cut as a rallying point for left- or right-leaning lawmakers; tends to fade amid larger crises ([57:03]).
• Mike Fiemer: Warns that administrative warrants can rapidly convert “sweeps” into “targeted” operations in name only; other agencies participating in ICE-led raids might face new liabilities ([58:49]).

III. The FBI Search of Journalist Hannah Nathanson

[60:49–82:22]

Incident

• FBI seized the personal and work electronics of Washington Post reporter Hannah Nathanson investigating a Defense contractor leak (relating to Venezuela ops).
• Raises serious alarm with civil liberties and press advocates.

Legal and Normative Context

• Case Structure: Two linked cases—one criminal (the leaker under Espionage Act 18 USC 793e), one involving the journalist ([62:48], Troy).
• Espionage Statutes: Middle ground between casual mishandling and intentional foreign aid. Statute covers “national defense information,” not strictly “classified” info—leading to fuzziness ([63:34]–[76:47]).
• Department of Justice Policies: Under Merrick Garland, policies made seizures from journalists rare; rescinded under current leadership, causing alarm about a swing too far ([66:54]–[80:36]).

Chilling Effect, First Amendment Concerns

• Molly Roberts: “Fuzzier than ever... There is a real chilling effect when the line that you believe to be in place appears to be getting eroded.” ([68:12]).
• Cases like AIPAC (lobbyists, not journalists), and the WikiLeaks prosecution, are touchpoints. It’s often unclear where journalism ends and criminality begins.
• Mike: Argues for national security interests—journalists are not always able to assess risk to sources/human life ([74:20], [80:47]).
• Molly: The pre-existing system appropriately targeted leakers, not journalists, balancing competing interests. Prosecution of journalists overcorrects ([79:00]).
• Troy: The administration’s changes leave prosecutors open to “damaging critiques of whether the Department of War is now calling the shots” ([76:50]).

NOTABLE QUOTES & MEMORABLE MOMENTS

• On the Georgia search and DNI’s presence:
  • “There is nothing... which gives the DNI any role whatsoever in law enforcement operations. To allow somebody who does not normally have that privilege on the scene of an active search creates a whole number of problems…”
    —Mike Fiemer [21:16]
  • “She’s mixing apples and coffee mugs.”
    —Mike Fiemer on Gabbard’s legal justifications [26:22]
• On broader administration strategy:
  • “I'm both more confident that they're not going to steal an election, but less confident that they're not going to try. And that is going to be really painful to work through.”
    —Scott Anders [37:58]
  • “I think the fact that he just went to a county and seized a bunch of ballot boxes makes me be like, why wouldn't he try to do that again…”
    —Molly Roberts [40:00]
• On the chilling press environment:
  • “Journalists are manifestly unable to weigh the potential damage to a human life that is helping the United States simply because they are not read in to anything that is not leaked to them. So they're operating in a contextless environment...”
    —Mike Fiemer [80:47]
  • “To go so far in the other direction that prosecutions of journalists are being contemplated seems to me like way overcompensating for whatever problems may have been there.”
    —Molly Roberts [79:00]
• On institutional damage:
  • “It’s just another example of the damage to each of the institutions involved... It’s significant damage to each of the institutions involved...”
    —Troy Edwards [40:43]

TIMESTAMPS OF IMPORTANT SEGMENTS

• [02:50–03:35]: Introductions and banter on Troy/LT’s nickname
• [04:11–10:00]: Georgia election search, facts, Trump and Tulsi Gabbard’s roles
• [10:00–15:29]: Statutes involved, legal reasoning, conspiracy/RICO discussion (Troy/Mike/Molly)
• [20:07–28:56]: DNI’s presence, chain of custody, letter from Gabbard, erosion of norms
• [30:14–41:54]: State vs federal authority, constitutional arguments, institutional ramifications
• [46:31–58:49]: ICE administrative warrants, Fourth Amendment issues, rapid "targeted" raids, task force liabilities
• [60:49–73:26]: Nathanson/Washington Post case, Espionage Act spectrum, government policy shifts
• [74:20–82:22]: Chilling effect on journalism, balancing national security and First Amendment, panel debate

ORIGINAL TONE & CONCLUSION

The podcast maintains an earnest, occasionally wry, tone—balancing legal technical detail with broader worries about institutional decay, governmental overreach, and the difficult balance between security and civil liberties. Each panelist draws on their own expertise (prosecutorial, journalistic, investigative) to clarify emerging risks and the meaning behind the week’s three warrant stories.

For more detailed written work and resources, visit lawfaremedia.org.