Slashdot Mirror


Administration Ordered To Divulge Legal Basis For Killing Americans With Drones

An anonymous reader writes "In a claim brought by The New York Times and the ACLU, the Second US Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the administration must disclose the legal basis for targeting Americans with drones. From the article: 'Government officials from Obama on down have publicly commented on the program, but they claimed the Office of Legal Counsel's memo outlining the legal rationale about it was a national security secret. The appeals court, however, said on Monday that officials' comments about overseas drone attacks means the government has waived its secrecy argument. "After senior Government officials have assured the public that targeted killings are 'lawful' and that OLC advice 'establishes the legal boundaries within which we can operate,'" the appeals court said, "waiver of secrecy and privilege as to the legal analysis in the Memorandum has occurred" (PDF).'"

5 of 310 comments (clear)

  1. Lets see what hapens by ganjadude · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wont hold my breath that he wont hide behind executive privilege or use bushes favorite "Turruiists!!!" but one thing I do know is that obama will find some way to avoid having to explain himself. Most transparent president in history and all....

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  2. Secret Laws? by Anna+Merikin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I am -- and the court seemed -- appalled at the idea that "secret laws" can apply in a constitutional republic.

    I doubt SCOTUS will touch this, as they tend to kick the can down the road on big issues like this, which, of course, will let it stand.

    1. Re:Secret Laws? by Prien715 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "Notice how many TV shows are about Law Enforcement these days?"

      We've always had shows about law enforcement, what's changed is perspective from the 70/80's to the 90/2000's.

      The former were about largely about innocent people accused of crime who got exonerated (Matlock, Murder She Wrote, Perry Mason, Diagnosis Murder) or plain old bad detectives (Get Smart, Inspector Gadget, The Pink Panther).

      In the modern era, the cops always find the right bad guy who may get off due to technicalities (Cold Case, Law and Order, CIS, Special Victims Unit, 24, Cops).

      When the cops are always moral and their accused guilty, our justice system eventually has laws passed to conform to our notions of pop culture.

      --
      -- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
  3. Re:Obligatory by arth1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So let me get this straight, it's perfectly OK to kill people with drones as long as they're not American citizens?

    It should be the other way around. A country should only be permitted to kill its own citizens, not citizens of other countries.
    The former is acceptable, given the citizens in question are part of the electorate who sanctioned the laws and government, giving them powers over their lives.
    The latter is an act of war and trespasses on the sovereignty of other countries and its citizens.

  4. Re:SCOTUS by Dishevel · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Yup. The problem here is not that the people do not have a means to control their government it is that the vast majority of them do not give a shit. We have become a nation of people that will wait till the cops arrive while being bludgeoned to death. We will vote which ever party promises us the most free stuff. We value the illusion of safety over freedom. the news anchor is our one true God.

    We have exactly the government we deserve.

    --
    Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?