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 LawFair.

That's patreon.com slash LawFair.

Also, check out LawFair's other podcast offerings, rational security, chatter, LawFair

no bull and the aftermath.

The best part is that the statute anticipates that there will of course be a

circumstances in which the president encounters a new potential associated force

and wants to so designate them. In the decade and a half old practices that the

executive branch makes such a determination and there are certain ways in which

these days Congress may may not be notified about it. It's not clear that the

public would ever be told and I use the example of a QIM. They may be in now we

just don't really know. And that to me is one of the things that's critical to

bear in mind is we look at this part of who's covered. The president is given

authority and it's sort of recognized in the statute. Not sort of is recognized

in the statute. The president can name additional associated forces that meet the

definition, talk about in a second, but he's then got to notify Congress and issue a

written justification for it and then it triggers fast track review procedures.

Of course it's always the case that Congress can decide to try to legislate so

how is this different. The thing that's different is that the procedural obstacles

that ordinarily could have things buried and committed are overridden by

statute such that some members gonna step up and say I want there to be a

bill to overturn that decision about an associated force. It can't just be

...