When the US Government Can Kill You, Explained

The Obama administration along with Attorney General Eric Holder went and spoke to Northwestern University Law Students to explain the administration’s theories that it “can kill American citizens suspected of terrorism without charge or trial.” The administration confronted analyzers and judges who acknowledged that the targeting of killing American citizens oppresses the Constitution. The Fifth Amendment states that “no one shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.” This amendment assures us that all levels of American government must operate within the law and provide fair procedures. Judicial process also known as procedural law which rules are designated to ensure a fair and consistent application of fundamental justice to all court cases before a court.

Attorney General Eric Holder explained that “due process” and “judicial process” is not the same thing and should not be treated as the same when dealing with national security.

There are no geographical limits to this theory when we are dealing with something as serious as the Al Qaeda.  "Neither Congress nor our federal courts has limited the geographic scope of our ability to use force to the current conflict in Afghanistan," Holder said. "We are at war with a stateless enemy, prone to shifting operations from country to country." The speech that Holder gave did outline limits of when the US is allowed and not allowed to target its own citizens. There has to be an “imminent threat of attack” to the United States and be beyond the American authorities to handle.

When talking about the “imminent threat of attack” Holder means that a person is a part of a specific plan to hurt or threaten American lives. The administration went onto reason that killing the suspect before the attack or before may save lives rather than not thinking about killing an innocent civilian. The process of life-and-death situation responsibilities are held by the executive branch and can happen faster than sending an informative or briefing fax is sent. Not all of Congress is behind this policy, Senator Ron Wyden is a representative that is still waiting on the legal document that explains and justifies this policy. I think that having this document as a hard copy would let a lot of other people be at ease as far as knowing and having it as a matter of fact and not still just a theory. Hina Shamsi, Director of the ACLU’s national security project asked for the Obama administration to release the Justice Department memo justifying the targeted killing program. This document has raised legal matters with the New York Times and the ACLU who in result are suing the United States Government. "Anyone willing to trust President Obama with the power to secretly declare an American citizen an enemy of the state and order his extrajudicial killing should ask whether they would be willing to trust the next president with that dangerous power” said Shamsi.

This is not just a theory for safekeeping this is a plan that has already be put into action with Anwar al-Awlaki who was killed in a drone strike in Yemen alongside another American Samir Khan. Al-Awlaki and Khan produced the extremist periodical Inspire, but until the bomber Umar Abdulmutallab the US provided no more information other than they were propagandists.

I believe that we are in a time where plans and policies such as this need to be put into order because we have seen what happens when we are unprepared or caught off guard the violence that we can experience from violent activists and hate crime groups. Part of the problem is when can someone be determined to not have the right of due process? Killing after a crime seems to be a defeat of the purpose, this policy seems to be a lot about speculation and unknowing. I also see the point of how we do need this because of where we are today debating nuclear missiles and terrorist groups that are still out there doing who knows what. It is best to be safe than sorry I guess when dealing with one deserving to an extent of a lost life rather than hundreds or thousands of innocent ones.