Yes, targeted killings can be legal
While torture is never, under any circumstances, permitted by law, targeted killing sometimes can be. The question—and it’s a big one—is when.
The DOJ white paper doesn’t succeed in answering the question. …
To say when targeted killing is legal, the white paper would have to do two things. It would have to identify a source of authority in the U.S. Constitution, or in laws passed by Congress, that gives the president the power to use force. And it would have to identify and apply the U.S. and international laws that limit when such force can be used.
Start with the source of authority. The white paper says that the president has some power to use force as part of his “constitutional responsibility to defend the nation.” Indeed, the Supreme Court has recognized that Article II of the Constitution gives the President at least some authority to, as the framers put it, “repel sudden attacks,” without having to go to Congress first for permission—in other words, to play defense in the moment. It’s not hard to imagine an argument that the government targeted U.S. citizen Anwar al Awlaki in Yemen because of a discovery that he was about to launch a particular, sudden attack. But the paper doesn’t actually make that argument. It’s not just that al Awlaki goes unmentioned. So does Article II. And true enough, the administration has been at pains, in court challenges to its detention power at Guantanamo, to avoid resting its claim of authority on the president’s constitutional power alone—precisely because such claims of authority can be overly broad.











Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Jihadis, then tea party folks, then all of you…slippery slope, fools.
Schadenfreude on February 9, 2013 at 5:42 PM
Targeted killings = good
Waterboarding = bad bad BAD
gryphon202 on February 9, 2013 at 5:42 PM
It is nothing, compared to the accompanying memos, which Obama doesn’t release.
Schadenfreude on February 9, 2013 at 5:43 PM
Don’t torture the poor SOB, just FRY him. We don’t need no information from him about future attacks. Jeez, the progs can be absolutely illogical, and still defend this lunatic policy.
tommy71 on February 9, 2013 at 5:53 PM
These people are idiots.
If torture is bad, but killing is good, just torture until you kill. That should make liberals happy.
darwin on February 9, 2013 at 5:58 PM
Don’t let these lunatics kid you … they’ll torture anyone if they think they need to, they’ll just hide it and lie about it. The liberal media will defend them anyway just like they’re defending killing American citizens.
darwin on February 9, 2013 at 6:00 PM
These people seriously need a lesson on torture.
Torture
Torture
Not Torture
The Rogue Tomato on February 9, 2013 at 6:02 PM
Meanwhile: http://www.silentscream.org/
davidk on February 9, 2013 at 6:02 PM
^This, too.
The Rogue Tomato on February 9, 2013 at 6:03 PM
Death penalty: Bad
Killing citizens without trial: good
The mind boggles.
lorien1973 on February 9, 2013 at 6:05 PM
Targeted: http://www.bob-owens.com/2013/02/dishonoring-the-corps-marines-in-inaugural-parade-had-bolts-removed-from-their-rifles/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BobOwens+%28Bob+Owens%29
davidk on February 9, 2013 at 6:16 PM
There is a reason the bolts are removed.
Bmore on February 9, 2013 at 6:54 PM
Obysmal’s White Paper plays it fast and loose with the terminology “imminent danger” when identifying these US-citizen enemy combatants.
Take some time to read the linked post, please.
A genuinely thoughtful piece by Andy McCarthy explores the issue of targeted killings of enemies in assymmetrical warfare and the flaws (and hypocrisy) in the WH “White Paper,” papering over its decisions. McCarthy concludes with a sensible solution in our open-ended state of seige with jihadists and Islamists.
A commenter after the piece, Jack Jolis, describes the difficulties of getting worthy intelligence from captured combatants because of the current “rules of war.”
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/340225/problems-white-paper-andrew-c-mccarthy
onlineanalyst on February 9, 2013 at 7:05 PM