The Just Security Podcast

Presidents have long pursued policy prerogatives through the Department of Justice, but traditionally, there’s been a clear division between those and the Justice Department’s enforcement decisions. On March 5, 2025, the NYU Law Forum and the Reiss Center on Law and Security at NYU School of Law co-hosted an all-star panel of experts who have served in senior positions at the White House and in the Department of Justice to assess the degree to which the division between the President and the Justice Department has now changed. Among the topics they discussed are: What is the origin of and reason for the Justice Department’s measure of independence? How has this independence worked given the Justice Department’s mix of political and career employees, and how is the current administration observing those lines? The expert panel consisted of Vanita Gupta, a Distinguished Scholar in Residence at NYU School of Law and the former Associate Attorney General of the United States; Lisa Monaco, a Distinguished Scholar in Residence at the Reiss Center on Law and Security and the former Deputy Attorney General of the United States; and Breon Peace, the former United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York. Trevor Morrison, a former Associate White House Counsel, the Dean Emeritus, Eric M. and Laurie B. Roth Professor of Law, and a Faculty Co-Director of the Reiss Center on Law and Security, moderated the discussion. Show Notes: Lisa MonacoTrevor MorrisonBlueskycoveragecoverage

Alongside the new Trump administration, a new Congress has also taken power in Washington, D.C. The 119th Congress brings unified Republican control of both chambers with key votes – such as confirming many of President Trump’s cabinet nominees – complete, another focus will be on congressional investigations and oversight. What might the oversight landscape look like? What investigative priorities will take center stage? And what role will key actors, both inside and outside of Congress, play in shaping policy and accountability over the next year? Joining the show to discuss what we can expect when it comes to congressional investigations is Ronak D. Desai. Ronak is the firmwide leader of the Congressional Investigations Practice at Paul Hastings LLP, where he advises clients facing high-stakes oversight inquiries and regulatory scrutiny. Ronak previously served on Capitol Hill in multiple roles, including most recently on a prominent select committee with members, including Adam Schiff, Adam Smith, Jim Jordan, and Mike Pompeo. In private practice, Ronak has handled a number of high-profile congressional investigations on behalf of clients on Capitol Hill both behind closed doors and publicly in the glare of the media spotlight. Show Notes: Ronak D. DesaiLinkedInXParas ShahLinkedInXcoveragecoverage

In just his first six weeks in office, President Donald Trump has issued more than 80 executive orders and other actions, many of them targeting the federal workforce and the structure of the federal government. Just Security’s Co-Editor-in-Chief, Ryan Goodman, recently published a timeline of actions that highlight the alarming level of politicization and weaponization of the Department of Justice under the second Trump administration. Politicization includes the misuse of the Department’s powers for political purposes rather than the independent and impartial enforcement of the laws. Weaponization includes a deliberate and systematic misuse of the Department’s powers for political or personal purposes and in defiance of the rule of law. Goodman discussed the timeline with Just Security Senior Fellow Tom Joscelyn and Mary McCord, Executive Director of the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection (ICAP), Visiting Professor of Law at Georgetown University Law Center, and former Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security at the Justice Department. Show Notes: Ryan GoodmanBlueskyLinkedInTom JoscelynBlueskyXMary B. McCordarticleAudrey Balliettecoverage

In his second term in office, President Donald Trump has already taken sweeping measures on immigration, the environment, the U.S. military, and the structure of the federal government. With so many executive orders, policy changes, and novel actions, it’s easy to wonder, “What just happened?” In this podcast mini-series we help to answer exactly that question. On each episode of “What Just Happened,” we’ll talk with leading experts, from former government officials to professors – the people who understand how government works from the inside and have studied the issues for years. They will explain the legal background and implications of how the Trump administration’s actions affect how the U.S. government operates in Washington, across the country, and around the world. This is not a political podcast. We are explaining the meaning and consequences of policy changes that may not be immediately apparent. Any opinions expressed are those of the speaker. Today, we are looking at a relatively narrow example of the Trump administration’s broad policies of eliminating federal jobs and eliminating what it considers to be DEI efforts from federal agencies. Specifically, we will talk about a small number of seasoned intelligence officers who were fired because one of their duties involved agency DEI efforts. They have sought an injunction against their termination in federal court in the Eastern District of Virginia. After a brief administrative stay, a federal judge denied their application for a temporary restraining order while the case proceeds. Our guest today is the fired officers’ attorney, Kevin Carroll. Kevin is a partner at the Fluet law firm in Northern Virginia. Kevin is a retired Army Colonel and a former CIA case officer. He also served as a senior counsel to Republican congressman Peter King of New York and a political appointee in the first Trump administration, and later as a surrogate for the 2024 Kamala Harris campaign. Show Notes: David AaronLinkedInXBlueskyLinkedInParas ShahLinkedInXcoverage

In his second term in office, President Donald Trump has already taken sweeping measures on immigration, the environment, the U.S. military, and the structure of the federal government. With so many executive orders, policy changes, and novel actions, it’s easy to wonder, “What just happened?” In this podcast mini-series we help to answer exactly that question. On each episode of “What Just Happened,” we’ll talk with leading experts, from former government officials to practitioners and professors – the people who understand how government works from the inside and have been engaged with these issues for years. They will explain the legal background and implications of how the Trump administration’s actions affect how the U.S. government operates in Washington, across the country, and around the world. As always, this is not a political podcast – we are explaining the meaning and consequences of policy changes that may not be immediately apparent. Any opinions expressed are those of the speaker. Today, we will focus on the federal civil service. What are the different types of civil servants, what protections do they have, what remedies are available to them, and what comes next for those Americans who have dedicated their careers to public service. Our guest is Suzanne Summerlin. Suzanne is a labor and employment attorney specializing in federal workforce issues. She has extensive experience in litigation, union advocacy, and federal labor policy. Among other jobs, Suzanne was previously an attorney for the National Federation of Federal Employees. This podcast does not contain legal advice. If you need legal assistance, you should contact an attorney. Show Notes: David AaronLinkedInXTess BridgemanLinkedInBlueSkyXRyan GoodmanBlueskyLinkedInSuzanne SummerlinLinkedInarticlescoverage

The Artificial Intelligence Action Summit recently concluded in Paris, France, drawing world leaders including U.S. Vice President JD Vance. The Summit led to a declaration on “inclusive and sustainable” artificial intelligence, which the United States and United Kingdom have refused to join, though 60 other nations, including China and India support the declaration. What are the key takeaways from the Summit? How might it shape other global efforts to regulate artificial intelligence? Joining the show to discuss the Summit is Dr. Brianna Rosen, Director of Just Security’s AI and Emerging Technologies Initiative and Senior Research Associate at the University of Oxford. Show Notes: Brianna RosenLinkedInXBlueskyParas ShahLinkedInXcoverageSeries

Around the world, lawyers – particularly those representing human rights defenders, political prisoners, and upholding the rule of law – face threats of disbarment, harassment, and prosecution simply for doing their jobs. Jan. 24 marked International Day of the Endangered Lawyer, which focused on Belarus this year. The Belarusian government has developed a toolkit of repression to silence members of the legal profession, with hundreds of lawyers facing disbarment or exile, and at least six sitting in jail based on dubious or politically-motivated charges. What tactics is the Belarusian government using? How can the international community best respond to support the legal profession and the rule of law? Joining the show to discuss the situation in Belarus are Nils Muiznieks, Maksim Polovinko, and Margaret Satterthwaite. Nils is the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus. He is a political scientist and human rights expert based in Latvia. Maksim is an expert of the Right to Defense project, until 2020, he was Editor-in-Chief of the magazine Jurist, and an event organizer for the Belarussian legal community. Margaret is a Professor of Clinical Law at NYU Law and the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers Show Notes: Nils MuižnieksLinkedInMaksim PolovinkoMargaret SatterthwaiteLinkedInXParas ShahLinkedInXarticleAloysia SonnetLinkedIncoveragecoverage

In the first quarter of the 21st century, U.S. presidential power has reached new heights in both domestic policy and foreign affairs. While the framers created a system of government defined by the separation of powers, the presidencies of George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and Donald Trump reveal a vision, and a version, of unilateral executive power. What are some reforms that could restore the balance? Harold Hongju Koh has studied presidential power for decades both as a professor and the former Dean of Yale Law School, and in various government roles, including as the Legal Adviser at the U.S. State Department. His new book, The National Security Constitution in the 21st Century, argues for structural reforms to realign the balance of power among Congress, the courts, and the president. Harold joined us to discuss the book and Just Security’s recent symposium featuring expert analysis and discussion on some of its key ideas. This episode was co-hosted by Just Security’s Co-Editor-in-Chief, Tess Bridgeman. Show Notes: Tess BridgemanLinkedInBlueSkyXHarold Hongju KohLinkedInXParas ShahLinkedInXsymposiumbookThe National Security Constitution in the 21st Century

The tech industry is calling this AI’s “Sputnik Moment” – and President Donald Trump has said it’s a “wake-up call” for U.S. companies. We’re talking about DeepSeek, the Chinese AI startup that has rapidly emerged as a formidable contender in the global AI race. DeepSeek is making waves for developing powerful open-source language models that rival leading U.S. competitors – at a fraction of the cost and with far lower computational requirements. The DeepSeek saga raises urgent questions about China’s AI ambitions, the future of U.S. technological leadership, and the strategic implications of open-source AI models. How did DeepSeek get here? What does its rise mean for competition between China and the United States? And how should U.S. policymakers respond? Today, we’re going beyond the headlines to dive deeper into DeepSeek. We’ll explore popular myths and misconceptions surrounding DeepSeek, the technology behind it, and what it means for national security and U.S. policy going forward. Joining the show to unpack these developments are leading experts in the field: Dr. Keegan McBride, Lauren Wagner, and Lennart Heim Keegan is a Lecturer at the University of Oxford and an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security. Lauren is a researcher and investor, now with ARC Prize, previously worked at Meta and Google. And Lennart is a researcher at RAND and a professor of policy analysis at the Pardee RAND Graduate School. This episode was hosted by Dr. Brianna Rosen, Director of Just Security’s AI and Emerging Technologies Initiative and Senior Research Associate at the University of Oxford. Show Notes: Lennart HeimLinkedInWebsiteXKeegan McBrideLinkedInXBrianna RosenLinkedInXBlueskyLinkedInXarticleKonstantin F. PilzBlueskyLinkedInWebsiteXarticlecoverageSeries

In his second term in office, President Donald Trump has already taken sweeping measures on immigration, the environment, the U.S. military, and the structure of the federal government. With so many executive orders, policy changes, and novel actions, it’s easy to wonder, “What just happened?” In this podcast mini-series we help to answer exactly that question. On each episode of “What Just Happened,” we’ll talk with leading experts, from former government officials to professors – the people who understand how government works from the inside and have studied the issues for years. They will explain the legal background and implications of how the Trump administration’s actions affect how the U.S. government operates in Washington, across the country, and around the world. This is not a political podcast. We are explaining the meaning and consequences of policy changes that may not be immediately apparent. Any opinions expressed are those of the speaker. Today, we will focus on President Trump’s potential deployment of the U.S. military. Trump has said that he intends to use more military resources to support border and immigration enforcement. Joining the show is Mark Nevitt. Mark is a professor at Emory University School of Law. Mark was previously a Commander in the Navy, where he was a tactical aviator and a JAG officer. This mini-series is co-hosted by David Aaron, Tess Bridgeman, and Ryan Goodman. Show Notes: David AaronLinkedInXTess BridgemanLinkedInBlueSkyXRyan GoodmanBlueskyLinkedInMark P. NevittBlueskyLinkedInXarticlecoverage

In just his first two days back in office, President Donald Trump has already taken sweeping measures on immigration, the environment, the U.S. military, and the structure of the federal government. With so many executive orders, policy changes, and novel actions, it’s easy to wonder, “What just happened?” In this podcast mini-series, we help to answer exactly that question. On each episode of “What Just Happened,” we’ll talk with leading experts, from former government officials to professors – the people who understand how government works from the inside and have studied the issues for years. They will explain the legal background and implications of how the Trump administration’s actions affect how the U.S. government operates in Washington, across the country, and around the world. This is not a political podcast. We are explaining the meaning and consequences of policy changes that may not be immediately apparent. Any opinions expressed are those of the speaker. Today, we will focus on President Trump’s Executive Orders, Proclamations, and other policy announcements regarding immigration and the border. Joining us is Steve Vladeck. Steve is a professor at Georgetown University Law Center. This mini-series is co-hosted by David Aaron, Tess Bridgeman, and Ryan Goodman. Show Notes: David AaronLinkedInXTess BridgemanLinkedInBlueSkyXRyan GoodmanBlueskyLinkedInSteve VladeckBlueskyLinkedInXcoverage

On Friday, Jan. 17, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, the law which could effectively ban TikTok from operating in the United States, unless it is sold to a U.S. company. The case is the latest round in a legal battle involving free speech, national security, and the popular social media app, which is used by more than 170 million Americans. U.S. lawmakers argue that TikTok’s ties to the Chinese government raise serious data protection and content manipulation concerns. Free speech advocates see the law as a fundamental afront to the First Amendment. How did the Supreme Court decide the case? And how might this decision impact future efforts to regulate social media companies with ties to foreign governments? Joining the show to discuss the Court’s opinion and its implications are Marty Lederman, Asha Rangappa, and George Wang. Marty is an Executive Editor at Just Security and a Professor at Georgetown University Law Center. He has served in senior roles at the Justice Department, including in the Office of Legal Counsel. Asha is an Editor at Just Security, a Senior Lecturer at Yale’s Jackson Institute for Global Affairs, and a former FBI Agent specializing in counterintelligence investigations. George is a staff attorney at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University. Show Notes: Marty LedermanBlueskyXAsha Rangappa(BlueskyXXiangnong (George) WangBlueskyLinkedInParas ShahLinkedInXcoveragecoverage

Just after midnight on Tuesday, Jan. 14, Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office released its report on President-elect Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. The report concludes that the evidence Smith obtained was sufficient to criminally convict Trump, but that after the 2024 election, the case could not move forward in light of Justice Department policy against prosecuting a sitting president. While the report reveals relatively little new factual information around the events of the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, it does explain Smith’s rationale for his legal positions and key decisions. The report could also have implications for other criminal proceedings, including state-level cases against fake electors. What are the report’s key take-aways and how might it add to the historical record? Joining the show to discuss the report are Tom Joscelyn and Marty Lederman. Tom is a Senior Fellow at Just Security. He was a senior professional staff member on the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol. Marty is an Executive Editor at Just Security and a Professor at Georgetown University Law Center. He served in senior roles at the Justice Department, including in the Office of Legal Counsel. Show Notes: Paras ShahLinkedInXTom JoscelynBlueskyXMarty LedermanBlueskyXarticleRyan GoodmanBlueskyLinkedInClearinghousecoverage

In just a few weeks, Donald Trump will begin his second term as U.S. president. During his campaign and after reelection, Trump has signaled sweeping reforms to the U.S. immigration system. Among his top goals are promises to conduct the largest mass deportation in U.S. history, militarize the border, and introduce more border surveillance. In recent years, digital technologies have impacted virtually every aspect of migration. From visa triaging algorithms to drone surveillance with biometric data collection capabilities, companies and governments are increasingly developing and using these technologies to implement their migration policies. How are new forms of technology affecting people on the move? Joining the show discuss border technologies and what we can expect from the new administration are Judith Cabrera and Petra Molnar. Judith is Co-Director of the Border Line Crisis Center, an organization which provides comprehensive networks of care to the migrant community in Tijuana, Mexico. Petra co-runs the Refugee Law Lab at York University and is a faculty associate at Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society. Show Notes: Judith CabreraPetra Molnar@_PMolnarParas Shah@pshah518book The Walls Have Eyes: Surviving Migration in The Age of Artificial Intelligence The New Presscoveragecoveragecoverage

Oleksandra Matviichuk is one of the leading lawyers and human rights advocates pushing for accountability for grave crimes committed during Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. In 2007, Oleksandra founded the Center for Civil Liberties, which she still leads. In 2022, it became the first Ukrainian organization to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. The center was awarded the prize that year alongside human rights advocate Ales Bialiatski from Belarus, and the Russian human rights organization Memorial. The Center for Civil Liberties aims to advance human rights and democracy in Ukraine and the broader Europe-Eurasia region. It defends individual rights, develops legislative changes, conducts public oversight over law enforcement agencies and the judiciary, and offers educational activities for young people. How does the Center for Civil Liberties promote accountability? And what does Oleksandra see as the key issues and trends to watch as this full-scale war nears its third-year mark in February? Just Security’s Washington Senior Editor, Viola Gienger, recently sat down with Oleksandra to discuss her work. Here is their conversation. Show Notes: Oleksandra Matviichuk@avalainaViola Gienger@ViolaGiengerParas Shah@pshah518Just SecurityarticleNatalia ArnoJasmine D. Cameronin UkrainianOona A. HathawayJust SecurityarticleMadeline BabinIsabel GenslerJust Security’scoverageJust Security’scoverageJust Security’scoverage2022 announcementwebsite

Among the many war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine are large-scale efforts to deport Ukrainian children to Russia. Thousands of children have already been taken to Russian camps and facilities, leading the International Criminal Court to issue arrest warrants for two senior Russian officials, including Russian President Vladimir Putin, in March 2023. Despite the arrest warrants, the deportations have continued. A new report from the Yale School of Public Health Humanitarian Research Lab identified 314 individual Ukrainian children that Russian officials transferred from Ukraine to Russia for coerced adoption and fostering, acts that likely constitute grave violations of international law. What are the report’s key findings? And how might they contribute to efforts toward accountability, including potential new criminal charges against Russian officials? Joining the show to discuss the report are Oona Hathaway and Nathaniel Raymond. Oona is a Professor at Yale Law School and an Executive Editor at Just Security. Nathaniel is the Executive Director of the Humanitarian Research Lab and a Lecturer in the Department of the Epidemiology of Microbial Diseases at the Yale School of Public Health. Show Notes: @nattyray11Oona A. Hathaway@oonahathawayParas Shah@pshah518articleMadeline BabinIsabel Genslercoveragecoveragecoverage

On November 22, the United Nations General Assembly’s legal arm, the Sixth Committee, adopted a resolution paving the way for negotiations on a first-ever treaty on preventing and punishing crimes against humanity. The resolution comes after years of impasse and after Russia and a handful of other countries dropped amendments that could have derailed the process at the last-minute. Crimes against humanity are those committed as part of a large-scale attack on civilians and include acts such as murder, rape, imprisonment, enforced disappearances, sexual slavery, torture and deportation. To be considered a crime against humanity, a violation doesn’t necessarily have to occur during an active war. And while crimes against humanity are covered by the International Criminal Court, nearly 70 countries are not members of the Court, which creates a gap in fully prosecuting these crimes in countries from Sudan to Syria to Myanmar. What can we expect next as States prepare for negotiations, and how might a future crimes against humanity treaty close the impunity gap? Joining the show to unpack the developments on the crimes against humanity treaty are Akila Radhakrishnan and Leila Sadat. Akila is an international human rights lawyer and gender-justice expert, who currently serves as the Strategic Legal Advisor for Gender Justice for the Atlantic Council’s Strategic Litigation Project. Leila is the James Carr Professor of International Criminal Law and longtime Director of the Whitney R. Harris World Law Institute at Washington University School of Law. Show Notes: Akila Radhakrishnan@akila_radLeila Nadya Sadat@leilasadat1Paras Shah@pshah518coveragecoveragecoverage

Earlier this fall, three Pacific Island States – Vanuatu, Fiji, and Samoa – formally proposed adding ecocide as a crime that can be heard and punished by the International Criminal Court, which can currently try individuals for war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, and the crime of aggression. Any change to the ICC’s Rome Statute, particularly adding a new international crime, would require a massive level of diplomatic coordination and negotiation. But the future crime might hold individuals criminally accountable for severe environmental damage, such as massive oil or chemical spills or the destruction of rainforests. In the meantime, what does the ecocide proposal mean in practice? How might it potentially impact our understanding of ongoing destruction of the environment and the role of international criminal law? Joining the show to unpack the ecocide proposal are Naima Fifita, Rebecca Hamilton, and Kate Mackintosh. Naima is a lawyer from Tuvalu. She is the Executive Director of the Institute for Climate and Peace. Bec is an Executive Editor at Just Security and a Professor of Law at American University. Kate is Executive Director of the UCLA Law Promise Institute Europe, and Deputy Co-Chair of the Independent Expert Panel on the Legal Definition of Ecocide. Show Notes: Naima FifitaRebecca Hamilton@bechamiltonKate Mackintosh@Katemackintosh2Paras Shah@pshah518articlecoveragecoveragecoverage

With the U.S. presidential election less than a week away, anxiety is high, both across the country and around the world. Many fear the rise of populism and the erosion of democratic norms. In over two centuries, the United States has had many presidents who pushed on the door of anti-democratic power, but it has also had people who pushed back. Ahead of the election, what lessons can we learn by looking to the past? Brown University political scientist Corey Brettschneider is one of the leading thinkers on presidential power. His recent book, The Presidents and the People: Five Leaders Who Threatened Democracy and the Citizens Who Fought to Defend It examines how John Adams, James Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Woodrow Wilson, and Richard Nixon abused their power, and how citizens like Frederick Douglass, Ida B. Wells, and Daniel Ellsberg resisted and offered a more democratic understanding of the Constitution. Just Security Senior Fellow Tom Joscelyn sat down with Brettschneider to discuss the book and the lessons it offers for the election, the state of American democracy, and beyond. Here is Tom’s conversation with Corey Brettschneider. Show Notes: Corey Brettschneider@BrettschneiderCTom Joscelyn@thomasjoscelynParas Shah@pshah518bookThe Presidents and the People: Five Leaders Who Threatened Democracy and the Citizens Who Fought to Defend It seriescoveragecoveragecoverage

For five years, Christopher Smith, a man with intellectual disabilities, was forced to work 100 hours per week at a South Carolina restaurant without pay. Smith faced verbal and physical abuse at the hands of his employer. Around the world, persons with disabilities like Smith face many modern forms of enslavement, from forced labor and begging to sexual exploitation and imprisonment by caregivers. While some of these crimes are prosecuted through national court systems, international criminal law can also play an important role in promoting accountability for grave crimes, including the crime of the slave trade. The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court is formulating a new Slave Crimes Policy, which he hopes will be “survivor-centred, trauma-informed and gender-competent.” How can international law, and the new policy, best account for the unique needs and challenges persons with disabilities face regarding slavery crimes? Joining the show to unpack how slavery crimes impact persons with disabilities and what the international community can do in response are Janet Lord and Michael Ashley Stein. Janet is the Executive Director of the University of Baltimore School of Law’s Center for International and Comparative Law and a senior research fellow at the Harvard Law School Project on Disability. Michael is the co-founder and Executive Director of the Harvard Law School Project on Disability, and a Visiting Professor at Harvard Law School. Show Notes: Janet E. LordMichael Ashley SteinParas Shah@pshah518Pace SchwarzMatthew “Hezzy” SmithAlex GreenRosemary KayessarticlecoveragecoveragecoverageHPOD