Join us as Professors Vladeck and Chesney discuss and debate the latest national security law news!  This week we’ve got:

And just when you think it can’t get any nerdier, it’s time for the frivolity–and for the Thrones Deadpool!

We are back after a spring break hiatus, and we do not lack for things to discuss and debate in the wide world of national security law.  Tune in for:

And of course it would not be the same without some frivolity.  We’ve got opinions about True Detective Season 3, traveling with infants to LA, the NCAA Tournament, and Hall and Oates. Seriously.

This week’s show features debate and discussion between co-hosts Professors Steve Vladeck and Bobby Chesney regarding:

And then, just because these two don’t know when to stop, there’s the frivolity: musings about US News Rankings, debate over the college admissions bribery scandal, and a surprise appearance by … Hall and Oates?  You make-a-my dreams come true, dear listeners!

So much to debate, so little time! Tune in as Steve Vladeck and Bobby Chesney plow through a host of recent (and not-so-recent) events in the world of national security law:

As for frivolity, let’s just say that Winter Is Coming on April 14, and we have a season 8 trailer to parse!

The Oscars may not have a host, but we do!  Tune in to our latest episode as co-hosts Steve Vladeck and Bobby Chesney debate a wide range of national security developments from the past week, including:

But these two can disagree about much more than the law.  They’ve got opinions on the Oscars too…

Ready to dive deep, way deep, into the president’s national emergency declaration and the resulting lawsuits?  We’ve got you covered.  Tune in as Professors Vladeck and Chesney tease out and debate the nuances.

Along the way, enjoy updates on three interesting cert. denials today at SCOTUS as well as the suddenly-looming question of whether the 2001 AUMF’s long-quiet “harboring” provision might be used to provide the domestic legal basis for military action against…Iran?

Your favorite weekly show combining serious debate about the latest national security legal developments with a healthy dose of frivolity is back! [ed. note: this is the only show like that, so you should delete the awkward bit where you claim this is their “favorite]

This week we open at the Supreme Court: What are the stakes in the Larabee litigation concerning the recall of retired military personnel in order to subject them to court-martial jurisdiction?  Is there anything to the claim in Hamidullin that U.S. courts should grant combatant immunity from prosecution to a Russian veteran who ambushed US and Afghan forces in 2009?  And while we’re talking SCOTUS, what was the deal with lifting a stay in a death penalty case in which a state was not in a position at that moment to provide access to a religious figure of the right persuasion during an execution? [ed. note: guys, guys…stay focused, that’s not exactly a national security case]

The Hamidullin case actually segues nicely [ed. note: Thank you for not writing Segway like you usually do.] to a review of the legal and other challenges that will arise if captured Islamic State fighters are taken to GTMO as part of a larger deal to resolve the fate of a large group of IS fighters currently held by SDF forces. [ed. note: I deleted the line where you made up a claim that an SDF wrote to you to say “Screw you guys in the West, we aren’t going to keep holding IS fighters from your countries if you are going to pull out of Syria and leave us to the mercy of Assad, the Russians, the Iranians, the Turks, etc.  Detain ’em yourselves!”  No one will believe they wrote you, however accurate that sentiment may be.]  

Speaking of terrorists behind bars, we’ve also got the unbelievable situation that recently unfolded in Germany, where a guy served a (comparatively-short) sentence for involvement in a plot to kill Americans in Germany, and the United States had just unsealed an indictment charging him with crimes in Afghanistan including the death of two U.S. soldiers.  Extradited to the U.S., right?  No, sent to Turkey, apparently based on a double-jeopardy theory.  Vas ist das? [ed. note: I changed your, ahem, more colorful sentence to the more-polite “vas ist das.”  Diplomacy, guys, diplomacy.  After all, you don’t read German and probably have the underlying facts at least partially wrong.]

Well, as long as we are talking about the arrest of terrorism suspects, we’ve got a National Security Division update involving the arrest of two guys who were supporters of Lashkar e-Tayyiba, the Pakistan-based terrorist group responsible for the 2008 atrocity in Mumbai.  One of the guys had expressed interest in training to become an executioner, particularly on the beheading side of that line of work.

Next, we have a very quick run-through of the legal issues raised by Project Raven, based on the recent Reuters story describing former NSA employees working as contractors for the UAE’s SIGINT service.  Pro tip: If you go to work for the UAE’s SIGINT service, do not act surprised when you find out they are monitoring political critics.  [ed. note: This whole bit on the show was just a half-baked recap of what Bobby wrote on Lawfare here.]

But you are in it for the frivolity, no?  [ed. note: no, no they are not.]  Excellent!  Well, we’ve been going to concerts and watching the Grammys, and we have strong opinions about all of it!  [ed. note: oh, joy, they have opinions about professional musicians. No doubt they’ll ask you two to tag-team host the Grammys next year.]

This week on the National Security Law Podcast, we’ve got:

And then there’s the Super Bowl.  You’ll hear more offense in our breakdown of the game, the halftime show, and the commercials than you saw in the game itself!

Unlike Rent Live, all of our personnel participated in this week’s show!  We’ve got:

Frivolity:  Super Bowl predictions –> Super Bowl halftime shows –> the “live musical” trend –> why didn’t Rent Live have an understudy???

Spread the word about our show, and be sure to give us a rating on iTunes or whichever podcast platform you prefer!

Welcome back to the National Security Law Podcast!  Where else can you get both a preview of a looming surveillance law debate *and* a fine-grained debate about how best for the NFL to address blown calls?  Well, maybe there’s no market for that…but here we are anyway!

This week, we open with a review of several interesting developments at the Supreme Court, followed by updates on the issues that two separate military commission defendants (Nashiri and KSM) have placed before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, and then a discussion of three FISA-related authorities that expire this December.  We wrap up with a short note on the legal implications of the apparent Trump Administration decision to recognize an opposition leader in Venezuela as the legitimate head of government there, and then conclude with an extensive debate about blown calls, instant replay, and overtime rules!