E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Two civil rights groups today sued the US government, seeking the legal authority to challenge the Obama administration's targeting of a radical cleric in Yemen, Anwar al-Awlaki -- who may now be America's most wanted terrorist.
The government says al-Awlaki has become one of the dominant recruiters of Americans for violent attacks on the homeland. He's said to have communicated with Major Nidal Hasan before last year's shootings at Ft. Hood and with Faisal Shahzad, who planted a car bomb in Times Square earlier this year. In addition, the FBI says he played a key role in the Christmas Day airline bomb plot. Intelligence sources say he has been the target of several unmanned drone attacks.
Now, the ACLU and the Center for Constitutional Rights say they've been asked by al-Awlaki's father to challenge the government's targeting of al-Awlaki, who is a U.S. citizen, born in New Mexico. The groups say the government has improperly "asserted authority to use lethal force against U.S. citizens located far from any battlefield without charge, trial, or judicial process of any kind."
In mid-July, al-Awlaki was formally placed on the global terrorist list, and federal law makes it a crime for any lawyer to represent someone on the list without getting a license from the government. The civil rights groups are suing over the government's refusal to grant them that permission.
"President Obama is claiming the power to act as judge, jury, and executioner while suspending any semblance of due process," said Vince Warren of the Center for Constitutional Rights. His group and the ACLU claim that lethal force can be used, outside of armed conflict, only in response to an imminent threat of deadly attack.
Leave a Comment:
Terrorists are bad enough but one who is a traitor is even worse. This is the one case the ALCU should NOT take.
I think that the ACLU is wrong on this issue. If this American born jerk wants to preach jihad and killing Americans then he should reap the whirlwind of destruction for sowing the winds of war. Death to al-Awlaki!
Yes, he should, but it should be done legally. I for one am very uncomfortable with the idea of my government being able to circumvent its own laws.
Due process exists to protect our citizens: to keep the government, from acting as judge, jury, and executioner. If he is a despicable human being, which is likely, then bring him to trial.
or just wait Intel they kill more kids with bombs and hope due process puts flowers on there grave so the way i see it if you are born here and you kid is Americasmost wanted for bombing Innocent americans then you are a threat to are government for your beliefs you put in there head and should be deported for your sons actions period
1: If he did the horrible things he is accused of, drag him here, bring him to trial, and let's have some justice.
2: it is against all laws of war to simply assassinate a non-combatant who is a) not it a war zone and b) a citizen of your own country. The government simply cannot be allowed to simply ignore laws any time they feel like it, and we should not cheer it when they do because that puts all of our civil rights in jeopardy.
3: Bloodlust is something I feel as well when people talk about doing violence to my fellow citizens, but bloodlust is not policy nor is it due process.
The ACLU does a lot of good but I disagree with this case. I can understand his father wanting to protect his son but if we place other terrorists on the Wanted list, then this American-born terrorist should not be exempt just because of who he is. He preaches hate, jihad, killing Americans and infidels in general, he is anti-American.
Why doesn’t the Federal Government take court action to revoke his citizenship ?
I believe this is a constitutional action and would effectively remove the ACLU from the argument.
Well being just a dumb old Country boy I may not have the right idea here but it would seem to me that if the gentleman or his parents have a problem with him being targeted because his alleged actions the simplest solution would be to send the young man an airline ticket home so that he will have chance to stand up before the judge and plead his case. As old Jerry Reed said "You can tell it all down at City Hall. When your hot, your hot"
This man, born in New Mexico, has taken up arms against his country of natural birth. His actions have lead to him being identified as a Terroist. Under that definition he is subject to targeting just like all other Terrorists.
The Oath of Office states that the person taking the oath swears to defend our Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic.
Case Closed!
*Thumbs down* to the ACLU for taking this case...
I agree with those comments above. If the guy is guilty of planning attacks on Americans then he should be targeted and eliminated.
The only problem I see with the above posts from you folks on the left is that you didn't give the right wing nut cases any fodder to come back and call you the pinko commie terrorist supporting traitors that they think you are.
The problem is: what keeps the gov't from calling YOU an Enemy of the State? The only protection you have is a fair trial. This is another case of the ACLU being in the right but on the side of a bad man. Certainly, an in-absentia treason trial should be enough for the gov't to get on the right side of this issue.
P.S --my right-wing-nut friends may want to think about this. It's the only thing protecting you from the black helicopters.
Cuz it'd be political suicide for our government to start calling people who obey the laws of our nation (well, OK, except maybe for the whole speed limit thing- that's really more of a suggestion than an actual limit, isn't it?) Enemies of the State?
The ACLU is similar to a terrorist organization in my opinion!
Gee, care to tell us why? Last time I checked, Al-Qaeda isn't defending peoples' civil rights...
And you are entitled to whatever crazy opinion you want! Even if it is factually incorrect, libelous, and pretty much indefensible.
That's what makes this country great.
Does anyone think Eric and company would have written the same thing if this was Bush, or would we be on the second page by now?
HMM,
Thanks for your intellectual honesty.
Yes, he should, but it should be done legally. I for one am very uncomfortable with the idea of my government being able to circumvent its own laws. Due process exists to protect our citizens: to keep the government, from acting as judge, jury, and executioner. If he is a despicable human being, which is likely, then bring him to trial.
WOW that is really scary that you dont understand LAW.
1. This guy might be an American BORN, but left the Country. He is no longer under the rules or laws of the USA, they only apply if your inside the Boarders of America. IF he is found and shot, hung or what ever outside of US states or Territories his Civil rights, rights to a fair trial does not exist. The LAWS OF THE USA do not apply to him any more then trying to get your one phone call in a Mexico Jail cell good luck with that.
2. ACLU should disband, they are no longer a force of good, just greed.
I think we tried the "let's pick and choose who has the right to a fair trial and who doesn't" plan before, and it was a disaster.
"He is no longer under the rules or laws of the USA, they only apply if your inside the Boarders of America. IF he is found and shot, hung or what ever outside of US states or Territories his Civil rights, rights to a fair trial does not exist."
So.....when I leave the country next month, I'm no longer a citizen? I had no idea. I guess I should watch out for drone attacks.
Oh, wait...
"Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481), as amended, states that U.S. citizens are subject to loss of citizenship if they perform certain specified acts voluntarily and with the intention to relinquish U.S. citizenship. Briefly stated, these acts include:
Guess I'm fine. Unless of course you'd like to make up some more ridiculous analogies about Mexican jails which confuse being subject to local laws and completely losing your rights as a citizen.
I guess no one reads... or understands... the Constitution any more.