Debate Club

Has Obama Gone Too Far With His Drone Policies? >

Department of Justice 'White Paper' Full of Contradictions

Protecting the U.S. from terrorist attacks is critical but so too is the rule of law

February 6, 2013

About Alexa Koenig:

Alexa Koenig is the executive director of the Human Rights Center at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law..

Protecting the U.S. from terrorist attacks is critical but so too is the rule of law

President Obama has repeatedly confirmed that taking the lives of Americans—even those affiliated with terrorist organizations—is subject to constitutional due process protections. The recent white paper justifying drone strikes against U.S. citizens is therefore a troubling contradiction.

First, the paper provides few objective limits on the government's ability to use drones against purported al Qaeda members—even U.S. citizens—other than requiring an "imminent" threat. Yet the government need not provide "clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future." Without proof of truly imminent danger, this nominal check on unfettered executive authority becomes baseless.

[Check out our editorial cartoons on President Obama.]

Second, the paper stresses that an individual involved in recent threatening activities remains an imminent threat if "there is no evidence suggesting he has renounced or abandoned such activities." Suddenly, a lack of evidence becomes evidence in a disturbing example of guilty until proven innocent.

Third, the paper problematically uses two Supreme Court cases—Hamdi and Hamden—to help argue that a U.S. citizen abroad can be killed if deemed an al Qaeda leader or "associated force." However, only Hamdi concerned the rights of a U.S. citizen, and it did not address the right to take a citizen's life. Instead, the court found citizen-detainees have the right to bring habeas claims to challenge their detainment before a neutral authority. And in Hamdan, the Supreme Court held that military commissions (as then constituted) were insufficient alternatives to federal trials because they violated the Geneva Conventions' Common Article 3 and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Both cases affirm the importance of meaningful due process and external oversight.

[See a collection of political cartoons on Congress.]

Our detainee-related experiences also offer precedent of a very different sort. When so many Guantanamo detainees—once declared the very "worst" terrorists by our executive branch—have subsequently been found to not be a risk, why should we be willing to trust that branch to make unchecked culpability determinations, especially when the stakes are higher?

Protecting the United States from terrorist attacks is critical but so too is the rule of law, which safeguards our democratic rights and freedoms. Even President Obama has noted the potential for a slippery slope when using lethal force against U.S. citizens. When the means for checking decision-making powers are ill-defined, when there is little to no external oversight, and when full and transparent debate has yet to occur, that slippery slope proves perilously steep.

Tags:
national security,
Supreme Court,
terrorism,
Barack Obama,
drones
Other Arguments
#1

Yes — Drone policy must be debated openly, as other countries will follow America's example

DIXON OSBURN, Director of Human Rights First’s Law and Security Program

#2
#4
#5
#5

No — Drone strikes work, and threats to the United States necessitate them

JAMES LEWIS, Director of the Technology and Public Policy Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies

#5

Reader Comments ()

About Debate Club

A meeting of the sharpest minds on the day's most important topics, Debate Club brings in the best arguments and lets readers decide which is the most persuasive. Read the arguments, then vote. And be sure to check back often to see who has gotten the most support—and also to see what's being discussed now in the Debate Club.

Have ideas about what the Club should be debating? E-mail it to dclub@usnews.com.

You can also join the debate on Facebook or follow Debate Club on Twitter.

Advertisement
Cartoons
Thomas Jefferson Street Blog
Syria, Israel and the Obama Administration's Absentee Foreign Policy

Creating a mess you are going to leave for someone else to clean up is not a good way to manage U.S. foreign policy.

Obamacare Contraception Mandate Targets the First Amendment

Obamacare's contraception mandate threatens the free exercise of religion .

Obama Passive-Aggressive in the Face of Syria Hawks

His decision to arm Syrian rebels was a passive-aggressive one.

Spring Robins and Family Make Politics Seem Silly

Maybe those of us in political battle should spend a little more time on miracles.

Equal Employment, Criminals and BMW’s Big Problem

Preventing former criminals who have served their time from getting a job helps nobody.

Study Shows Paid Sick Days Help Contain Deadly Diseases Like Flu

GOP insistence on standing between workers and paid sick days is making us all ill.

Poll: Voters Want Results From Congress, Not Just Effort

Republicans are kidding themselves if they think voters will reward them just for trying.

Obama Praised for Leading From Behind on Immigration and Tax Reform

Congress praises Obama's low profile on immigration and tax reform.

Advertisement