NEWS

Brandon van grack: The Lawyer at the Crossroads of National Security, Enforcement, and Policy

0 4 9 minutes read

If you follow U.S. legal or national security news, you’ve probably come across the name Brandon L. Van Grack. He’s one of those lawyers whose work is influential behind the scenes — often in crucial investigations, prosecutions, and policy shifts — but who doesn’t appear constantly in headlines. Still, what he does matters a lot: think foreign influence, sanctions, export controls, national security law.

In this article I want to walk you through who Van Grack is, what he’s done, and why his work matters — not just for lawyers or government officials, but for companies, foreign governments, tech firms, anyone interested in how law, national security, and policy intersect. I’ll also explain things like FARA and export control law, because without them the importance of his work is hard to see.

2. Early Life, Education, and Early Career

Brandon L. Van Grack studied at Duke University where he earned a Bachelor of Arts. He then went on to Harvard Law School for his law degree (J.D.).

Even before his more famous DOJ roles, Van Grack built experience in government legal work. He clerked for Judge Thomas F. Hogan at the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. From there, he took various roles in the Department of Justice (DOJ), especially in national security, export control, and counterintelligence. These early roles grounded him in both the technicalities of law (statutes, regulation) and in practical enforcement. Understanding technical law is one thing; enforcing it without overstepping civil liberties is another. Van Grack has had to learn to balance both.

3. Roles in the DOJ

Van Grack’s DOJ work spanned several major areas:

Trial Attorney, Counterintelligence & Export Control Section: He prosecuted cases under export control and sanctions laws, which regulate how goods, tech, or services move across borders, especially with national security implications.
Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for National Security: That role had him advising and overseeing some of the DOJ’s policies and decisions in national security, including how to handle foreign influence, export controls, and sanctions.
Senior Assistant Special Counsel in Mueller’s Office: Under Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III, Van Grack was a top deputy in investigating the Russian government’s interference in the 2016 U.S. election. Particular assignments included prosecuting Michael Flynn and assisting in the Manafort case.

These positions put him at the center of some of the most politically and legally sensitive issues in recent U.S. history. He wasn’t just prosecuting cases; he was helping define how U.S. law deals with foreign interference, espionage risk, and how loosely or strictly to enforce rules about foreign agents.

4. Chief of the FARA Unit: What Changed Under His Leadership

One of Van Grack’s most important roles was as Chief of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) Unit at the DOJ.

What is FARA?
FARA is a U.S. law that requires individuals or entities acting on behalf of foreign principals (governments, political groups, etc.) to register with the Department of Justice. The idea is transparency. If someone is advocating in the U.S. for a foreign entity, or involved in influencing U.S. policy or public opinion under foreign direction, these activities should be disclosed. Without FARA, foreign influence can be hidden. Many criticize the law for being vague or outdated; enforcement historically was irregular.

Van Grack’s influence
When he took over the FARA Unit, the DOJ made enforcement a higher priority. Under his leadership:

The number of investigations opened by the FARA unit increased.
There were more enforcement actions and registrations than before.
Van Grack oversaw first civil injunctions under FARA in decades.

So his tenure is often seen as part of a shift: from a law that was somewhat dormant or inconsistently enforced, to one that is more actively used. That has implications: for non-profits, companies, foreign actors, even media organizations — anyone whose work might touch on foreign influence.

5. Key Cases & Enforcement

To understand Van Grack’s impact, it helps to look at specific cases and how they illustrate what he does, how he thinks about enforcement, and how the legal system responds.

The Michael Flynn case
Flynn served briefly as national security advisor to President Trump. Under Mueller’s investigation, Flynn pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI about his communications with the Russian ambassador. Van Grack was one of the prosecutors leading that case.

That case became contentious. After some time, there were efforts to withdraw the prosecution. Flynn’s legal team alleged prosecutorial misconduct. Van Grack and his team denied wrongdoing.

For many observers, this case shows how high the stakes are: national security, politics, public trust. Small decisions in prosecution can become huge controversies.
Paul Manafort trial
Manafort, former campaign chair for Trump, was prosecuted for financial crimes, among other things. Van Grack was part of the trial team.

Manafort’s case had many facets: foreign account work, lobbying, influence in Ukraine, hiding money, etc. Van Grack’s role in it shows his experience is not just in narrow statutes but in complex, multi-layer cases where national security, finance, foreign policy all intersect.
Other enforcement & sanction/export control cases
Van Grack also prosecuted cases involving export controls, sanctions violators, and foreign influence. For example, under his DOJ roles, he oversaw or contributed to export control and sanctions reviews, including those involving foreign investment (CFIUS) and transactions that could affect national security.

6. Transition to Private Practice & His Current Role

In early 2021 Van Grack made a move many former government lawyers do: he joined private practice. He became partner at Morrison & Foerster (often called MoFo), co-chairing their National Security and Crisis Management groups.

What does this work look like now?

Helping companies with FARA compliance: advising them when they must register, how to disclose, audits, etc. Since enforcement has increased, companies want to stay on the right side.
Advising on sanctions and export controls: e.g. if a company wants to sell certain technologies to foreign countries, or if regulatory policy shifts (recent U.S. sanctions, or export control changes).
Handling foreign investment reviews (CFIUS) or related oversight. Mergers or acquisitions involving foreign parties often need U.S. government clearance if there’s national security risk.
Crisis management: when legal or regulatory risk morphs into public risk, e.g. investigations or enforcement actions, possible exposure.

His background gives him credibility: having been inside DOJ, seen how cases are built, what prosecutors care about, what courts accept. That experience is valuable to clients, especially when the risk is high.

7. Legal & Policy Context

To understand why Van Grack’s work matters, and what the stakes are, I’ll sketch the legal landscape around the major themes he’s involved in.

FARA law: As noted, Foreign Agents Registration Act is a U.S. law from 1938 (with updates), designed for transparency. But until recently, enforcement was spotty. Many people didn’t register (sometimes because the rules weren’t clear). Under Van Grack, the DOJ has pushed for more active enforcement: more investigations, more registrations, more accountability. That changes behavior, especially among organizations, nonprofits, media, public affairs firms, foreign liaison groups.

Export Controls & Sanctions: These laws regulate trade, technology transfer, and financial transactions that may end up aiding foreign adversaries or violating U.S./international policy. For example: dual-use technologies (items that have both civilian & military uses), data security, AI, semiconductors. Van Grack’s work touches export control violations and sanctions enforcement.

CFIUS (Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States): This is a U.S. interagency body that reviews foreign investments for national security implications. When Van Grack was in the DOJ, he was involved in CFIUS reviews. Companies with foreign investment plans often need to get approval, or may be forced to alter structure. National security concerns can involve technology, infrastructure, intellectual property, etc.

Counterintelligence / National Security Law: This encompasses laws about foreign espionage, foreign influence, cyber operations, etc. Van Grack’s roles often bring together several of these: e.g., a desk that handles export controls might cross into national security if tech is going to a place of concern; foreign influence cases might involve political persuasion, information campaigns.

So Van Grack’s work sits at the intersection of law, policy, enforcement, and geopolitical risk. That means many stakeholders: government agencies, companies, foreign governments, civil society, and the public.

8. Challenges, Criticism, and Controversies

No legal career at this level is without controversies or trade-offs. Van Grack’s has some, and they illustrate deeper tensions in how the U.S. handles national security and civil liberties.

Flynn case criticism: As mentioned, the Flynn prosecution became politically charged. Questions were raised about how certain decisions were made, whether there was prosecutorial over-reach, fairness, etc. Even though Van Grack denied misconduct, the case remains part of the public conversation. It shows how legal norms and procedure matter, especially under intense political scrutiny.
Vagueness in laws like FARA: One criticism often leveled is that FARA’s definitions are broad or ambiguous. What counts as “acting on behalf of a foreign principal”? What is “political activity”? Organizations sometimes say they didn’t realize they needed to register, because the rules were not clear. Lawyers like Van Grack, when enforcing stricter rules, have to respond to these concerns.
Balancing enforcement and civil liberties: National security laws often involve secrecy, classified info, surveillance, etc. Ensuring accountability, due process, transparency is hard. For example, investigations into foreign influence might implicate free speech, political advocacy. Export controls can halt innovation.
Public perception / political pressure: In high-profile cases, especially ones tied to politics (2016 election interference, etc.), everyone is watching. Decisions are criticized depending on people’s political leanings. Lawyers like Van Grack are under pressure: from government, public, media, perhaps even political actors. Their work can become a flash point.

9. What His Work Means for the Future

Looking forward, Van Grack’s role helps highlight several trends, risks, and things to watch.

More enforcement of FARA and related laws: If the DOJ continues to make foreign influence a priority, then more organizations will be careful to comply. We may see an expansion of what qualifies for registration, or more audits, more disclosure demands.
Tech, AI, and export controls will get more complex: As technologies evolve (AI, semiconductors, quantum computing, etc.), export control laws will adapt. Lawyers and companies will need guidance. Van Grack’s work in export control means he’s well placed to shape this.
Data, cybersecurity, and international firms: Cyber threats and data flows raise national security issues. Laws about foreign actors influencing elections or public opinions will intersect with social media, disinformation, data privacy. Van Grack’s background in investigations and national security means he may be involved in setting precedents here.
Private sector movement and compliance cost: Companies, especially global ones, will need to invest in compliance: legal advice, internal audits, transparency around foreign relationships. Because penalties for non-compliance (sanctions, fines, reputational harm) are high.
Policy, legislative developments: FARA could be revised by Congress. Export control rules may change (especially under pressure from global competition, national security concerns). Van Grack’s work both inside the DOJ and now in private practice gives him a voice in these developments.

10. Conclusion

Brandon L. Van Grack is a figure whose career helps map how U.S. national security law is evolving. From his DOJ work to his private practice now, he has helped shift enforcement in key areas: foreign influence, sanctions, export controls. His cases (Flynn, Manafort, etc.) are more than legal dramas—they are chances to see where law, politics, and security converge.

For anyone interested in law, policy, tech, or business that crosses borders, understanding what he does is useful. It’s not just about knowing his biography, but seeing the systems he’s affected, the risks he’s exposed, and the direction things may go.

FAQ

Q1: What is FARA and why is it important?
A1: FARA is the Foreign Agents Registration Act, a U.S. law that requires people or groups working on behalf of foreign principals to register their activities. It’s important because it increases transparency about foreign influence, helps the government track and regulate those influences, and reduces hidden political or lobbying activities.

Q2: What was Brandon Van Grack’s role in the Mueller investigation?
A2: He was Senior Assistant Special Counsel. He helped lead investigations into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election. He prosecuted the Flynn case and was part of the team in the Manafort trial.

Q3: What does Van Grack do now at Morrison & Foerster?
A3: He is a partner and co-chair of their National Security and Crisis Management groups. He works on investigations, white collar defense, sanctions, export controls, foreign influence law (FARA), compliance, and advising clients facing national security risks.

Q4: Why have his prosecutions been controversial?
A4: Some cases, especially the Flynn case, attracted criticism about prosecutorial decisions, how evidence was used, whether due process was respected. Also, laws like FARA and export controls involve balancing public interest, national security, and civil liberties, which isn’t always clear cut. There is often disagreement over where to draw lines.

Q5: How might his past and current work affect companies or organizations?
A5: Organizations that do international work — whether foreign clients, foreign funding, tech exports, etc. — may face more scrutiny. They may need to invest more in compliance, disclosure, legal advice. Regulatory enforcement is stricter, so legal risk is higher. Also, the rules (or interpretations of rules) could change, so staying informed is crucial.

Conclusion

Brandon L. Van Grack is more than a “lawyer in Washington.” He’s become a bridge between legal enforcement agencies, national security, and private sector risk. His work shows what happens when laws that were once lightly enforced gain bite.

For people in law, business, or policy—especially those dealing with foreign interactions, exports, technology, or influence—knowing what Van Grack has done and what he may do is valuable. It’s a reminder: in an interconnected world, legal risk is global, policy is powerful, and transparency matters.