3 ms·
Interestingly enough, the phrasing in the article implies that the Justice Department is arguing that speech made outside the US is not protected, not simply sp
by ameister14 7y ago
Interestingly enough, the phrasing in the article implies that the Justice Department is arguing that speech made outside the US is not protected, not simply speech made by non-citizens.
I would be incredibly surprised if that argument held up.
- bumby 7y agoSee Anwar al-Awlaki for some evidence of how the US applies constitutional rights to citizens abroad when they are considered enemies of the state
- ameister14 7y agoWas that legally supported? I think it just wasn't challenged
- bumby 7y agoACLU challenged with multiple cases. As far as I know they were dismissed https://www.aclu.org/cases/al-aulaqi-v-obama-constitutional-challenge-proposed-killing-us-citizen https://www.aclu.org/cases/al-aulaqi-v-obama-constitutional-... https://www.aclu.org/cases/al-aulaqi-v-panetta-constitutional-challenge-killing-three-us-citizens https://www.aclu.org/cases/al-aulaqi-v-panetta-constitutiona...