From the Dirksen Senate Office Building where the Judiciary
Committee is holding a Department of Justice oversight hearing with
Attorney General Eric Holder: A major story coming into this
hearing is Senator Rand Paul’s (R-KY)
epistolary exchange with Holder regarding the government’s
possible legal authority to target U.S. citizens on U.S. soil with
military force, without trial. Other key issues include the
proposed assault weapons ban, which goes to markup in the Judiciary
Committee tomorrow morning, prevention of financial fraud, the
fines against BP related to the Gulf oil spill, and the effects of
the sequester on the Department of Justice’s various
activities.
Holder’s opening statement touched on these issues, dwelling on
the administration’s call for an assault weapons ban and other
expanded gun regulations, including limits on armor-piercing
ammunition. However, there was one exception. Holder’s statement
included minimal, general discussion of national security issues.
No references were made to targeted killings or the legal
justifications for drone warfare.
After talking around Chairman Leahy’s (D-VT) question on the
matter — “Can you agree there is no scenario in which it would be
appropriate for the government to use an armed drone on U.S. soil?
to strike at an American citizen?” — and seeming to shake his head
to indicate his endorsement of Senator Feinstein’s (D-CA) assertion
that she did not think that such a strike would be legal, he was
driven to give a simple, one-word answer by Texas Senator Ted Cruz
(R-TX).
Cruz asked whether a strike on an American citizen with known
involvement in terrorist plots against the United States sitting in
a cafe and not posing an imminent threat to any U.S. citizen would
be constitutional on American soil, as apparently it is overseas.
Holder demurred, but after the two went back and forth a couple of
times, Cruz lost his patience and explained, “My question isn’t
about propriety: Do you think it’s constitutional?” Holder dodged
again, and Cruz responded that he would simply move on, but Holder
interjected, “I thought I was saying no — no.” Feinstein nodded
her head and Holder looked over, seeming to acknowledge their
earlier exchange.
Without ruling out further developments, it would appear that
the Attorney General of United States of America has indicated that
the federal government lacks constitutional authority to target an
American citizen with deadly force on American soil without
trial.
Big Java| 3.6.13 @ 11:40AM
And since when did the Constitution mean anything to this bunch.
Mike G| 3.6.13 @ 11:59AM
What Holder did is what his boss would want him to do. Muslims are encouraged lie to their enemies in order to advance their agenda.
Occam's Tool| 3.6.13 @ 12:18PM
So no drone strikes on Michael Moore.