Law Talk With Epstein, Yoo & Cooke Who's More Libertarian? Iran, Guns, and the Limits of Law
20 snips
Mar 20, 2026 
Richard Epstein, a libertarian legal scholar, and John Yoo, a constitutional and national security law professor, debate U.S. action in Iran and the role of imminence in anticipatory self-defense. They dissect a major 2nd Amendment fight over banning firearm possession by drug users. They clash over parental rights, school secrecy, and where constitutional protections for parents come from.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Imminence Means Expected Harm Not Just Timing
- Imminence in international law is not purely temporal and can include anticipated harm magnitude.
- John Yoo argues nuclear-era threats raise expected-harm calculations, citing the Cuban Missile Crisis and anticipatory self-defense doctrine.
Contextual History Can Satisfy Imminence Concerns
- Imminence need not be the only justification for preemptive action; preparedness, patterns, and prior hostile conduct matter.
- Richard Epstein cites Iran's long record since 1979 and refusal to renounce hostile rhetoric as contextual reasons to act earlier.
Iran's Regional Strikes Breach Both Jus Ad Bellum And Jus In Bello
- Iran's retaliation violated both the right to go to war and laws of war by targeting civilians and multiple third-party states.
- John Yoo highlights attacks on airports and hotels as breaches of jus in bello norms protecting civilians.