The following podcast contains advertising.

To access an ad-free version of the Lawfare podcast, become a material supporter of Lawfare at

patreon.com slash lawfare. That's patreon.com slash lawfare.

Also, check out Lawfare's other podcast offerings, Rational Security, Chatter,

Lawfare No Bull, and The Aftermath. Despite, I think, the kind of generally genial manner

of Judge Murphy on the case and his willingness to give

DHS some wiggle room and not requiring that these individuals in South Sudan be immediately

returned to the U.S.

It did seem to me like that requirement for a declaration and for that notice was potentially

a real problem for the government here.

It's the Lawfare podcast. I'm Benjamin Wittes, editor-in-chief of Lawfare, with legal fellow James

Pierce and Lawfare senior editors Quinta Jurecic and Roger Parloff.

The real question here will be how extensive does a court interpret this concept of a legislative

act?

I think under the D.C. Circuit case law, she would have a pretty compelling argument that she was

engaged in a legislative act, kind of irrespective of what the facts look like on the ground.

In the May 22nd trials of the Trump administration, we discussed a court hearing over the attempted deportation of immigrants to South Sudan,

the arrest of Democratic Representative La Monica McIver, the Supreme Court opinion allowing President Trump to remove members of independent agencies and so much more.

So we are going to start today with what we're not going to talk about.

We're not talking about Harvard University today, even though it is sure to end up

playing a big role in some future lawfare live. And the reason we're not talking about it is because

you guessed it, it's not in litigation yet. The administration has announced that it is going to be

...