Feds Don’t Have to Provide Legal Rationale for Targeted-Killing Program

The federal government is not required to provide the legal rationale behind its targeted killings of American citizens with drones, according to a district court opinion.

From Wired.com:

U.S. District Court Judge Colleen McMahon of New York, ruling in lawsuits brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and The New York Times, said she was caught in a “paradoxical situation” (.pdf) of allowing the administration to claim it was legal to kill enemies outside traditional combat zones while keeping the legal rational secret.

The opinion comes months after 26 members of Congress asked Obama, in a letter, to consider the consequences of drone killing and to explain the necessity of the program. The use of drones to shoot missiles from afar at vehicles and buildings that the nation’s intelligence agencies believe are being used by suspected terrorists began under the George W. Bush administration and was widened by the Obama administration to allow the targeting of American citizens. Drone strikes by the Pentagon and the CIA have sparked backlashes from foreign governments and populations, as the strikes often kill civilians, including women and children.

Pastor Ko-Rect

Ever since the Constitution was effectively eliminated as a check against court decisions, it was only a matter of time before we made it to the next step.

We are now witnessing the beginning of a new precedent stream – to make secret court decisions. Now anything the judge wants is automatically correct and automatically follows precedent. No longer does he have to write an opinion that references some other smuck judge that never agreed with. No longer are appeals necessary. Politicians have been waiting for this opportunity since 1787.

With the new revolutionary method of referencing secret decisions, politicians no longer have to justify their legislation because everything they want will be automatically legally correct.

Maybe they can even simplify the name of the new government – dictatorship?
Anonymous

Only one more step, and that’s firing drone missiles at American Citizens on US soil. It won’t be long, now…
Anonymous

The quick answer is to know where all your elected officials and judges live. I like to drop by and deliver flowers, or thank-you cards, or birthday presents, just to let them know that I know where they sleep at night. It is good for them to fear us.
Dave in Ann Arbor

AKA the umpteenth story that could feature this headline:

“Government court sides with government”
Phenry

Didn’t legislation get passed not too long ago to allow up to 30,000 drones in the skies over the US?
Anonymous

‘a “paradoxical situation” (.pdf) of allowing the administration to claim it was legal to kill enemies outside traditional combat zones while keeping the legal rational secret’
I had to doulbe take that statement, when a judge tries to make excuses while keeping it secret you can automatically assume it’s wrong.
-Thorax232
——————————————–
Family Survival Course Book
Anonymous

I can only respond thus:

No Conspiracies:
The nature of drone warfare must remain classified because there are in fact strict rules and a due process in selecting which targets legally qualify for assassination. If the enemy knew these rules, they would exploit them. If these protections did not exists, there would not need to be a classification over the process.

Big Conspiracy:
This judge, in mentioning the ‘paradox’ references both Alice-in-Wonderland – a trigger for themes of deep conspiracy, mind control, and manipulation of government pawns – and Catch-22 – a story of how government in war will screw you no matter what. This is all in one sentence. One conclusion is that the judge is using the classic tactic of discrediting her captors who have forced her to reach her conclusion. This is her signal, very subtle, yet as vocal as possible without appearing explicit, that she is being coerced.

One might say the truth is somewhere in between, but in this case I’d say it’s one or the other. I won’t offer an over-under.
Anonymous

Point is that this practice of secret drone assassinations *might* be perfectly legal, but the nature of its secrecy means that it could turn perfectly illegal overnight and none of us would know.
Anonymous

I know FAA relaxed drone restrictions, and repealed their GPS-guided drone regulation for all domestic government uses.