Eric Holder: Targeted killings legal, constitutional
\nBy JOSH GERSTEIN – 5 March, 2012 – Politico <\/p>\n
CHICAGO \u2014 Attorney General Eric Holder Monday presented the Obama administration\u2019s most detailed justification for armed drone strikes against Al Qaeda leaders, arguing that the U.S. government doesn\u2019t legally need judicial review to kill terrorist operatives overseas \u2014 even when they\u2019re Americans.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s clear that United States citizenship alone does not make such individuals immune from being targeted. But it does mean that the government must take into account all relevant constitutional considerations with respect to United States citizens \u2013 even those who are leading efforts to kill innocent Americans,\u201d Holder said in a speech delivered at Northwestern University School of Law.<\/p>\n
Questions about the legal basis for lethal U.S. drone operations have swirled for years, particularly as the Obama administration stepped up drone strikes in Pakistan. However, the queries and criticism became more intense after reports in 2010 that a New Mexico-born cleric, Anwar al-Awlaki \u2014 killed in a Sept. 2011 drone strike \u2014 was on a list of terror suspects that the U.S. had decided to target using deadly force.<\/p>\n
Holder is the highest ranking administration official yet to defend the administration\u2019s position, arguing that placing terror suspects on a so-called kill list is subject to \u201crobust oversight,\u201d but should not and need not involve the courts.<\/p>\n
\u201cSome have argued that the president is required to get permission from a federal court before taking action against a United States citizen who is a senior operational leader of al Qaeda or associated forces. This is simply not accurate,\u201d Holder said. \u201cDue process and judicial process are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security. The Constitution guarantees due process, it does not guarantee judicial process.\u201d<\/p>\n
Holder\u2019s half-hour speech came in the wake of months of internal administration debate about how to respond to calls for the release of a still-secret Justice Department legal opinion justifying the use of deadly force against al-Awlaki. The address appeared to reflect a decision to shed some more light on the legal standards the administration applies in such cases, but stopped short of the transparency demanded by many critics and even some supporters of the policy.
\n…more<\/a><\/p>\n