{"id":24244,"date":"2026-05-10T15:31:09","date_gmt":"2026-05-10T19:31:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/georgetown-law-journal\/?page_id=24244"},"modified":"2026-07-02T11:54:11","modified_gmt":"2026-07-02T15:54:11","slug":"the-national-security-internet","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/georgetown-law-journal\/in-print\/volume-114\/volume-114-issue-3-february-2026\/the-national-security-internet\/","title":{"rendered":"The National Security Internet"},"content":{"rendered":"

In response to widespread foreign surveillance and growing geopoliti<\/i>cal distrust, governments are erecting a national security internet. <\/i>Pioneered by <\/i>China, national firewalls have gone global. But where fire<\/i>walls sought to keep information out, they now seek to keep data in. <\/i>Governments keen to avoid their citizens\u2019 data from falling into foreign <\/i>hands demand not only that personal data be stored on local servers, but <\/i>also require that it be stored on local servers by local companies<\/i>\u2014<\/span>what <\/i>this Article calls <\/i>\u201c<\/span>data localization squared.<\/i>\u201d <\/span>Enforcing this demand <\/i>requires a new mechanism of transnational control: immunity from foreign <\/i>jurisdiction. Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems, too, now need licenses for <\/i>export. We are witnessing the creation of Digital Berlin Walls, complete <\/i>with Checkpoint Charlies to permit border crossings.<\/i><\/p>\n

The ascent of digital border controls in the name of national security <\/i>treats a domain of speech and commerce according to the rules of war. <\/i>This Article traces this turn through six case studies: TikTok, the United <\/i>States <\/i>\u201c<\/span>rip and replace<\/i>\u201d <\/span>program, the Chinese <\/i>\u201c<\/span>Delete America<\/i>\u201d <\/span>program, <\/i>Microsoft 365, connected cars, and AI models. The TikTok saga is but the <\/i>visible edge of a broad reconfiguration of international economic relations <\/i>largely occurring through obscure administrative processes. Existing schol<\/i>arship <\/i>has <\/i>recognized various aspects of this national security turn; this <\/i>Article weaves <\/i>together regulatory moves from TikTok to cars, from the <\/i>United States to China, to identify a paradigm shift in digital regulation.<\/i><\/p>\n

The Article argues that the national security internet will come at a <\/i>steep price, disrupting trade and investment, reducing competition, invit<\/i>ing <\/i>retaliation, <\/i>increasing government control over speech, and <\/i>under<\/i>mining efforts to stem climate change and promote development, while <\/i>offering easily circumvented protection against foreign surveillance. The <\/i>Article introduces a typology of corporate strategies to satisfy national <\/i>security demands and assesses their limitations. The Article proposes <\/i>reforms that constrain foreign surveillance in order to protect both civil <\/i>rights and national security.<\/i><\/p>\n

Continue reading The National Security Internet<\/em><\/strong><\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

Chander_The-National-Security-Internet<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In response to widespread foreign surveillance and growing geopolitical distrust, governments are erecting a national security internet. Pioneered by China, national firewalls have gone global. But where firewalls sought to keep information out, they now seek to keep data in. Governments keen to avoid their citizens\u2019 data from falling into foreign hands demand not only […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":13871,"featured_media":0,"parent":24239,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"abstract.php","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-24244","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/georgetown-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/24244","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/georgetown-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/georgetown-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/georgetown-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/13871"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/georgetown-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=24244"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/georgetown-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/24244\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":24590,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/georgetown-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/24244\/revisions\/24590"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/georgetown-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/24239"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/georgetown-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24244"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}