Tech, Law & Security Program at American University Washington College of Law的封面图片
Tech, Law & Security Program at American University Washington College of Law

Tech, Law & Security Program at American University Washington College of Law

律师事务所

Washington,DC 1,833 位关注者

Tackling the challenges and opportunities posed by rapidly changing technology. @techlawsec

关于我们

The Tech, Law & Security Program (TLS) at American University Washington College of Law, is a leading hub of research, innovation, and education. Leveraging its expertise, vision, and unique position in the nation’s capital, TLS brings together leaders and stakeholders from across the public and private sectors to develop innovative solutions, shape outcomes, and empower the next generation of diverse leaders. @TechLawSec Sign up here: bit.ly/techlawsecsignup

网站
https://wcl.american.edu/techlaw
所属行业
律师事务所
规模
51-200 人
总部
Washington,DC
类型
教育机构
创立
2019

地点

  • 主要

    4300 Nebraska Ave NW

    US,DC,Washington,20016

    获取路线

Tech, Law & Security Program at American University Washington College of Law员工

动态

  • The Justice Department gives us a first glimpse into the workings of its recently renewed CLOUD Act agreement between the United States and the United Kingdom in a first-of-its-kind report to Congress. Advisory Board Member Richard Salgado discusses some early successes, unexpected shortcomings, and several significant issues that must be addressed by policymakers. In light of recent reports that the U.K. is aggressively pursuing Apple in another attack on encryption, it also highlights the necessity of fortifying such agreements to fulfill the aims of the CLOUD Act and protect cybersecurity and national interests. Read more below. #TLSPublications #TLSInTheNews https://loom.ly/5QVB0Bg

  • Save The Date! September 15 - 17, 2025 Upwards of 100 States, either directly or through regional organizations, have now weighed in on the important questions of whether and how international law applies to cyber operations. While some concordance of views is evident, significant areas of discordance have emerged as well. The relatively unprecedented and growing use of national statements—in the form of official speeches, papers, or contributions to United Nations processes—to express States’ views has also raised questions about their normative function and whether the views offered are creating, intentionally or not, a form of lex specialis of international law tailored to the cyber and information context. And if not, what normative implications do these emerging positions have for the interpretation and application of international law rules outside of the cyber context? What are the implications of states remaining silent on certain issues, or not issuing positions at all? At the same time, cyber and information conflict has not abated, and the pace, sophistication, and impact of these threats will only increase with the introduction of artificial intelligence and other technological advances. How international law responds to these developments, especially at a time of heightened instability, should remain at the top of States’ agendas. The Tech, Law, & Security Program (TLS) is excited to once again host our annual symposium at the American University Washington College of Law on September 15-17, 2025 in partnership with: Lieber Institute for Law and Warfare, West Point, Federmann Cyber Security Center Cyber Law Program, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, NUS Centre for International Law and NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence (CCDCOE). The Fourth Annual Symposium on Cyber and International Law—Navigating Emerging Gaps & Seams, will again bring together leading experts from across the globe to address this timely and important topic. Register early here: https://lnkd.in/eXSM_Hj6

    • 该图片无替代文字
  • ?? Advisory Board Member Richard Salgado’s latest article with Lawfare examines how people rely on service providers to safeguard their data—including resisting improper surveillance demands. The DOJ’s “moot and scoot” tactic, however, undermines this gatekeeping role and keeps challenges out of sight.?Read more below. #TLSPublications #Privacy #TLS

    查看Richard Salgado的档案

    Harvard & Stanford Law, Salgado Strategies LLC

    More than ever, people rely on service providers to protect the data they entrust to them, including to defend against improper government surveillance demands. The Department of Justice has deployed a “moot and scoot” tactic to frustrate this gatekeeping function and keep challenges under wraps. I discuss this approach with a few recently unveiled examples in this piece published by the The Lawfare Institute. https://lnkd.in/gzG3u6x2

  • Today is AUWCL Giving Day, and we have an incredible opportunity to double our impact! A generous anonymous donor is matching all donations to the Tech, Law, and Security Program, up to $10,000. Donations allow us to continue our work tackling critical issues at the intersection of technology, law, and national security—equipping students, scholars, and practitioners with the knowledge and skills needed to navigate today’s most pressing challenges. Your support helps fund research, student initiatives, and events that drive meaningful conversations and policy advancements. ?? Donate today and double your impact! ?? https://loom.ly/nHp-Muc #AUWCLGivingDay #TechLawSecurity #TLS

    • 该图片无替代文字
  • Earlier this month, Associate Program Director Laura Draper participated in a panel discussion at the Cyber 9/12 Strategy Challenge, coordinated by the Atlantic Council and hosted at the University of Texas at Austin. The event occurred less than a week after the Chinese company DeepSeek launched its latest AI models, and so the conversation naturally turned to AI and national security. The Biden Administration emphasized AI safety, whereas the current administration has pivoted to prioritize innovation. Although not mutually exclusive, safety and innovation are often in tension with one another—what is the right balance? Draper shared her thoughts on this issue in the latest installment of The Legal Code, TLS's biweekly newsletter. Sign up for the newsletter to hear from the TLS team on current issues and to learn about upcoming events here: https://loom.ly/GDtFs3Q.

    • 该图片无替代文字
  • In the digital age, laws written decades ago still shape how we understand privacy, surveillance, and online rights. But what happens when legal definitions fail to keep up with evolving technology? This article from Senior Researcher Shanzay Pervaiz explores how outdated legal terminology distorts policy debates and leaves critical gaps in digital governance. Read more here: https://loom.ly/Jy7R5a0

  • Associate Program Director Laura Draper joined Dean Bobby Chesney (UT Austin School of Law), Brock Dahl (Freshfields), and moderator Francesca Lockhart (Strauss Center) for a keynote panel discussing AI, national security, and cyber policy. The panel closed out the first day of the two-day Austin Cyber 9/12 Strategy Challenge, hosted by the Strauss Center in partnership with the Atlantic Council's Cyber Statecraft Initiative. Draper also served as a judge, and saw several fantastic teams from across the country compete! #TLSInTheNews

    • 该图片无替代文字
  • Important questions from Senior Project Director Alex Joel prior to Tulsi Gabbard's confirmation hearing for Director of National Intelligence. #TLSInTheNews

  • Important insights by Senior Project Direct Alex Joel on the importance of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board in executing the EU-US Privacy Framework and overall intelligence oversight.

    查看Alex Joel的档案

    Scholar-in-Residence and Adjunct Professor at American University Washington College of Law

    I have a lot of thoughts about the story in the New York Times that President Trump's team has asked that the Democratic members of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board resign by tomorrow. https://lnkd.in/gEz8Kpjr Many who have worked with me know the depth of my support for the vital oversight role the PCLOB has played since its creation. I was the Civil Liberties Protection Officer for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence from 2005 through 2019, and worked closely with each version of the Board during that time. I vividly remember when the Board first stood up in 2006 as part of the Bush Administration's Executive Office of the President. It disbanded in 2007 when a member resigned out of concern that the Board could not be sufficiently independent if it was in the EOP. The resigning member (Lanny Davis) wrote that the structure might have worked if the President had issued an order with three simple words: "Leave them alone." https://lnkd.in/gYSCeexi That same year Congress passed the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 which reconstituted the Board as an "independent agency within the executive branch." https://lnkd.in/gdbrYY7X. It sought to resolve the issue of independence by moving the Board outside of the direct ambit of the President's supervision. A great deal rides on the continued strength and vitality of the intelligence oversight function. It is crucial for public trust in an environment where secrets must be kept to protect national security. Secrecy breeds suspicion, and suspicion creates distrust. Robust, independent oversight is essential. In addition, the Board plays a key role in the EU-US Data Privacy Framework, which enables data flows to continue between Europe and the United States. U.S. tech leadership does not exist in a vacuum - it flourishes due to the ability of U.S. tech companies to innovate and succeed in a global--and highly complex--regulatory environment. The EU-US Data Privacy Framework as been crucial in bridging the regulatory gap between the US and the EU. Disrupting the independence of the PCLOB threatens to upend that crucial balance. I have always felt that a robust, independent oversight body is not only consistent with American values, but also shows confidence that our intelligence professionals are working hard to do the right thing in the right way. If they make mistakes or take a wrong path, independent experts should be on hand to help ensure they get back on the right track.

  • Make sure to take a look at Senior Project Director Alex Joel’s newest article on Just Security tackling the challenges and opportunities faced by the IC in 2025 and beyond. #TLSPublications

    查看Alex Joel的档案

    Scholar-in-Residence and Adjunct Professor at American University Washington College of Law

    The horrific attack in New Orleans is an unwelcome reminder of the threats we face as a nation. The start of the new year -- and a new administration and new Congress -- is a good time to take stock of how well positioned the Intelligence Community is to deliver decision advantage to policymakers in the face of evolving threats and rapidly changing technology. I do that in "Law and Leadership for National Security in 2025 and Beyond" on Just Security. Article link: https://lnkd.in/eSiuzQGb The article examines the challenges and opportunities for the IC, focusing on the leadership role of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) in the context of the IC’s current structure, and the critical importance of FISA Section 702 as the IC’s premier intelligence tool. It highlights the need for collaborative leadership, proactive transparency, and robust oversight to maintain public trust as the IC acts to preserve, improve, and judiciously deploy its powerful authorities in the new year and beyond. With 18 elements, 16 of which are nested in larger departments, the IC is confoundingly complex. In the article, I liken it to an orchestra; it works best when the elements are attuned to one another, using their instruments skillfully and harmoniously, with the musicians understanding and fulfilling their roles to their utmost abilities. With significant--but limited--legal authorities, the DNI acts as the conductor, to help ensure that the music from the whole is better than the sum of its parts. As Jane Harman once said, the DNI's job is "50 percent law and 50 percent leadership." And if the IC is an orchestra and the DNI its conductor, then one can think of the authorities enabling agencies to collect, analyze, and disseminate intelligence as the musical instruments. And there is no more important instrument than?Section 702?of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). FISA Section 702 was just reauthorized for two years (and significantly amended) in April 2024 by the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America (RISA) Act. Link to RISA Act: https://lnkd.in/e9cQyASP Reauthorizing Section 702 by April 2026, with our without additional amendments, will require a compelling public reaffirmation not only of its value, but also of the effectiveness of its privacy safeguards. As the article discusses, the IC must provide robust transparency into the status, impact, and effectiveness of the RISA Act’s changes so that policymakers and the public can judge whether and how to further tune this critical instrument so that the IC orchestra can perform at its highest potential. Again, here's a link to the article: https://lnkd.in/eSiuzQGb

相似主页

查看职位