I think it will be interesting to see where the CITT goes with these types of cases. We only have two where they've accepted jurisdiction or taken on a matter and looked at an NSE. They're walking a fine line right now with respect to what their role is in the definition of national security and whether or not their role is to look and determine whether there's a legitimate national security interest at play or whether their role is to simply look at whether there's a nexus between some belief by the government that there's a national security interest at play and the limits to the national security exception.
These are two very different things. In one instance they'd be diving into the details to find out whether there's a legitimate threat. In the other, they're simply looking to see if there's a justification in linking them, leaving that discretion to the government to decide for itself what national security is. Is there a link to that subjective belief by the government that there's a national security interest at play and a link to the scope of the national security exception that's invoked?