4 ms·
Filibustering is great and all, but how about introducing some legislation clarifying the issue that US citizens are off limits to drones? It would be too easy
by olympus 14y ago
Filibustering is great and all, but how about introducing some legislation clarifying the issue that US citizens are off limits to drones? It would be too easy for Holder or Obama to say, "okay, we won't do it" and then go back on their word. Having the law on the books makes it a lot tougher for Obama and any future presidents to kill citizens without affording them their full right to trial.
- homosaur 14y agoI'm sure that will happen sooner rather than later, but Brennan's dog and pony show is a perfect place to make a nice point about the issue since he's one of the prime advocates for the drone movement.
- SoftwareMaven 14y agoDon't we have something more powerful than a law on the books now? The 5th Amendment is pretty clear on the subject: you must follow due process. I honestly don't see how a strike on US soil against a US citizen could be seen as constitutional. But then, there have been a lot of things over the past 15 years that I've felt the same way about.
- olympus 14y agoThe 5th Amendment is great, but that doesn't mean that Congress can't pass something clarifying how drone strikes fit into that framework and settling the issue before someone gets blown up by a Hellfire missile. I don't see how anything like drone strikes on US soil could be constitutional either, regardless of what the memos and briefings from the Attorney General's office say. But I'd sure like this to be put to bed before someone dies from it, and I think that Congress should be the place to do it. It would be almost impossible to vote against such legislation and would probably help Congress' approval rating because they will be doing something worthwhile.
- jff 14y agoThe standard process seems to be to violate the Constitution, then continue doing it until the Supreme Court tells you you've been very naughty.
- mpyne 14y agoAnd even that didn't stop Andrew Jackson.
- retrogradeorbit 14y agoAnd then claim that "due process" doesn't mean a court and actually means a bunch of securocrats sitting in a room with a list of names going kill? or not kill?
- anigbrowl 14y agoWell, there's this other stuff in the Constitution about Congress having powers to define the rules of war and Congress has exercised that power. You have to take the Constitution as a whole, not just the bits that suit your argument.
- InclinedPlane 14y agoThe letter of the law doesn't bring the dead back to life. And what's written in the constitution is irrelevant if 2 branches of government brazenly decide to ignore it, as has happened far too many times in the past.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]