The following podcast contains advertising.

To access an ad-free version of the LawFair podcast,

become a material supporter of LawFair at patreon.com slash law fair.

That's patreon.com slash law fair.

Also, check out LawFair's other podcast offerings,

rational security, chatter, law fair no bull, and the aftermath.

Maybe this self-defense exception can swallow the rule,

and become a loophole that opens the door to simply unconstrained

warfare once again under the label of self-defense.

But on the other hand, once you have troops on the ground,

and have partner forces, it is inevitable.

And so I think there was, in working through that during this year,

there was a growing sort of comfort with normalizing that situation

of sort of more regular self-defense strikes.

But there was also a recognition that if this was going to be something

that was going to be happening routinely, rather than, you know, once or twice in a blue moon,

it raised increasing pressures on for what the domestic legal authority was for these strikes.

I'm Quinteduristic, and this is the LawFair podcast, December 3, 2016.

Early this week, the New York Times published a story by Charlie Savage, Eric Schmidt,

and Mark Mazzetti, informing us that the Obama administration had once again expanded the scope

of the 2001 authorization for the use of military force.

Whereas the administration had previously considered the AUMF to cover military action

...