Analysis: What's Wrong With Having a Secret Assassination Court?
- By Wendy Kaminer
- The Atlantic
- February 13, 2013
- Comments
At least the president's appropriation of power to summarily kill Americans is extra-legal. It hasn't been codified or approved by any other branch of government. In justifying assassinations, Obama can't invoke any congressional or judicial actions; he can only repeat Richard Nixon's infamous maxim: "If the president does it, it's not illegal."
So it's not surprising to learn that the Obama Administration has considered establishing a special, secret court to authorize targeted killings. Modeled after the FISA court, which authorizes national-security-related domestic surveillance, a Targeted Assassinations Program (TAP) court -- my name for it -- would provide judicial cover for the president's actions without providing substantive judicial review.
"Having the executive being the prosecutor, the judge, the jury and the executioner all in one is very contrary to the traditions and the laws of this country," newly elected Maine Senator Angus King asserted, in support of proposals for a TAP court. But in essence, the executive would remain prosecutor, judge, and jury, even if the law required a little judicial approval.
By using this service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although GovExec.com does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.
The Vast Majority of IRS Employees Aren't Corrupt
GSA Mishandled Executive Bonuses
EIG 2013 as Told by Your Tweets
Infographic: Nominee Limbo
Will You Be Furloughed?
Boldly Go Where No Fed's Gone Before
Sponsored
3 Ways Data is Improving DoD Performance
Need to Know Memo: Big Data
Cutting costs: Inside the effort to improve the efficiency of federal operations
Addressing the 3 Biggest BYOD Security Threats
