Skip to comments.U.S. Can Kill Citizens Abroad Under Certain Circumstances, Memo Says
Posted on 06/23/2014 10:35:11 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
The U.S. government can kill an American citizen abroad if that person is plotting to attack Americans and U.S. authorities can't apprehend them, according to a newly declassified government memo. The document laid out the legal rationale for a drone-missile strike that killed terror suspect Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen in 2011.
The 2010 memo, which a court released Monday, has been at the heart of a debate about the legality of the U.S. government ordering deadly force from a drone against a U.S. citizen overseas. The strike...
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Whatever happened to “innocent until proven guilty?”
So much for that inconvenient Constitution thingy...
It was just an outdated, racist document, anyway, right??
and to think I was recently teaching my middle-schooler that we are a Constitutional Republic. Dang.
I guess we are now a Memo-Driven Oligarchy.
When I think of “government by memo” I see an old faded hand typed document with the word Berlin in bold, an eagle and swastika stamp, and the appropriate signatures near the bottom.
Would that be Obama’s war on American citizens? This looks a lot like the death penalty for unproven thought crimes (plotting).
What about the 5th Amendment? Does a U.S. citizen retain his constitutional protections when he is outside of U.S. jurisdiction? SCOTUS decided in several citizenship cases that the U.S. could not deny citizenship in various circumstances to individuals who were not present in the U.S. at the time, but does that inherently mean that those people had constitutional protection while abroad? I don’t know.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Islam happened on 911.
Maybe those folks are just on vacation and meeting new people
All without judge, jury or even a formal verdict...just because the “gods” say so.
You have no Constitution. Keep taking it and enjoy your tyranny.
What makes this tough is the “victims” are low life scum who probably deserve it. Only “probably” shouldn’t be the level of surety for administrative killings. You have probably had bad thoughts, per Obama’s judgement.
18 U.S. Code § 1119 - Foreign murder of United States nationals(1111 refers to murder. 1112 refers to manslaughter. 1113 refers to attempted murder and manslaughter.)
b) Offense. A person who, being a national of the United States, kills or attempts to kill a national of the United States while such national is outside the United States but within the jurisdiction of another country shall be punished as provided under sections 1111, 1112, and 1113.
The text of the AUMF:
(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.I haven't get read the whole memo, but so far, I don't see any consideration of a citizen's constitutional protections.
The administration's conclusion relies on the SCOTUS decision in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld which says, essentially, that the AUMF authorized the President to detain a member of the Taliban who was captured abroad in an armed conflict against the U.S. on a traditional battlefield even if he is a citizen of the United States.
The administration further concludes that since the AUMF authorizes lethal force against enemy belligerents that the AUMF authorizes the President to use lethal force against a U.S. citizen abroad who is engaged in armed conflict against the U.S.
Does that “Kill Courtesy” extend to include errant members of THE NINE SUPREMES, in the always correct opinion of the Administration of the Day?
By jing, we are back to Medieval Times again!