President Obama has authorized CIA and Military kill lists
Breaking News November 22, 2010
http://ccrjustice.org/
http://ccrjustice.org/newsroom/press-releases/obama-administration-claims-unchecked-authority-kill-americans-outside-comba
http://ccrjustice.org/newsroom/press-releases/obama-administration-claims-unchecked-authority-kill-americans-outside-comba
Obama Administration Claims Unchecked Authority To Kill Americans Outside Combat Zones
Federal Court Hears Arguments Today In ACLU And CCR Case Challenging Administration's Claimed Authority To Assassinate Americans It Designates Threats
CONTACT: press@ccrjustice.org
November 8, 2010, WASHINGTON – The Obama administration today argued before a federal court that it should have unreviewable authority to kill Americans the executive branch has unilaterally determined to pose a threat. Government lawyers made that claim in response to a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) charging that the administration's asserted targeted killing authority violates the Constitution and international law. The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia heard arguments from both sides today.
"Not only does the administration claim to have sweeping power to target and kill U.S. citizens anywhere in the world, but it makes the extraordinary claim that the court has no role in reviewing that power or the legal standards that apply," said CCR Staff Attorney Pardiss Kebriaei, who presented arguments in the case. "The Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected the government's claim to an unchecked system of global detention, and the district court should similarly reject the administration's claim here to an unchecked system of global targeted killing."
The ACLU and CCR were retained by Nasser Al-Aulaqi to bring a lawsuit in connection with the government's decision to authorize the targeted killing of his son, U.S. citizen Anwar Al-Aulaqi. The lawsuit asks the court to rule that, outside the context of armed conflict, the government can carry out the targeted killing of an American citizen only as a last resort to address an imminent threat to life or physical safety. The lawsuit also asks the court to order the government to disclose the legal standard it uses to place U.S. citizens on government kill lists.
"If the Constitution means anything, it surely means that the president does not have unreviewable authority to summarily execute any American whom he concludes is an enemy of the state," said Jameel Jaffer, Deputy Legal Director of the ACLU, who presented arguments in the case. "It's the government's responsibility to protect the nation from terrorist attacks, but the courts have a crucial role to play in ensuring that counterterrorism policies are consistent with the Constitution."
The government filed a brief in the case in September, claiming that the executive's targeted killing authority is a "political question" that should not be subject to judicial review. The government also asserted the "state secrets" privilege, contending that the case should be dismissed to avoid the disclosure of sensitive information.
The lawsuit was filed against CIA Director Leon Panetta, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and President Barrack Obama in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Attorneys on the case are Jaffer, Ben Wizner, Jonathan Manes and Jennifer Turner of the ACLU; Kebriaei, Maria LaHood and Bill Quigley of CCR; and Arthur B. Spitzer of the ACLU of the Nation's Capital. Co-counsel in Yemen is Mohammed Allawo of the Allawo Law Firm and the National Organization for Defending Human Rights (HOOD).
For more information on the case, including fact sheets and legal papers, visit www.ccrjustice.org/targetedkillings
The Center for Constitutional Rights is dedicated to advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Founded in 1966 by attorneys who represented civil rights movements in the South, CCR is a non-profit legal and educational organization committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change.
CCR and the ACLU v. OFAC & Al-Aulaqi v. Obama
Video Link
http://vimeo.com/13832801
Synopsis
On August 3, 2010, the Center for Constitutional Rights and the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Treasury Department and the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) to challenge the legality and constitutionality of the licensing scheme that requires them to obtain a license in order to file a lawsuit concerning the government’s asserted authority to carry out targeted killings of individuals, including U.S. citizens, far from any battlefield.
On August 30, 2010, CCR and the ACLU filed suit on behalf of Dr. Nasser Al-Aulaqi against President Obama, CIA Director Panetta, and Defense Secretary Gates, challenging their decision to authorize the targeted killing of his son, U.S. citizen Anwar Al-Aulaqi, in violation of the Constitution and international law.
Status
CCR and the ACLU filed suit against the Department of Treasury and OFAC on August 3, 2010 and filed suit on behalf of Nasser Al-Aulaqi against President Obama, CIA Director Panetta, and Defense Secretary Gates, on August 30, 2010. Both cases are pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. An oral argument for Al-Aulaqi v. Obama is scheduled for November 8, 2010.
Description
In early July 2010, CCR and the ACLU were retained by Nasser al-Aulaqi, the father of U.S. citizen Anwar Al-Aulaqi, to bring a lawsuit in connection with the government’s decision to authorize the death of his son, who was placed on kill lists maintained by the CIA and the U.S. military’s Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) earlier this year. On July 16, 2010, however, the Secretary of the Treasury labeled Anwar al-Aulaqi a “specially designated global terrorist,” which makes it a crime for lawyers to provide representation for his benefit without first seeking a license from OFAC. CCR and the ACLU sought a license, but after the government’s failure to grant one despite the urgency created by an outstanding authorization for Al-Aulaqi’s death, CCR and ACLU brought suit challenging the legality and constitutionality of the licensing scheme as applied to the representation they seek to provide. CCR and the ACLU have not had contact with Anwar Al-Aulaqi.
The OFAC requirements generally make it illegal to provide any service, including legal representation, to or for the benefit of a designated individual. A lawyer who provides legal representation for the benefit of a designated person without getting special permission is subject to criminal and civil penalties. In their lawsuit, CCR and the ACLU charge that OFAC has exceeded its authority by subjecting uncompensated legal services to a licensing requirement, and that OFAC’s regulations violate the First Amendment, the Fifth Amendment, and the principle of separation of powers. The lawsuit asks the court to invalidate the regulations and to make clear that lawyers can provide representation for the benefit of designated individuals without first seeking the government’s consent.
The underlying representation that CCR and the ACLU seek to provide Nasser Al-Aulaqi would challenge the government’s decision authorizing the CIA and JSOC to target and kill his son, who is currently hiding in Yemen, without charge, trial or any form of due process.
While the government can legitimately use lethal force against civilians in certain circumstances outside of a judicial process, the authority contemplated by senior Obama administration officials is far broader than what the Constitution and international law allow. Under international human rights law, lethal force may be used in peacetime only when there is an imminent threat of deadly attack and when lethal force is a last resort. A program in which names are added to a list though a secret bureaucratic process and remain there for months at a timeplainly goes beyond the use of lethal force as a last resort to address imminent threats, and accordingly goes beyond what the Constitution and international law permit.
Moreover, targeting individuals for killing who are suspected of crimes but have not been convicted – without oversight, due process or disclosed standards for being placed on the kill list – also poses the risk that the government will erroneously target the wrong people. Since 9/11, the U.S. government has detained thousands men as terrorists, only for courts or the government itself to discover later that the evidence was wrong or unreliable and release them.
For additional information see:
- CCR Press Release
- CCR Legal Director Bill Quigley
- CCR Fact Sheet
Other Media
Video of Yemen Human Rights Panel
by Center for Constitutional Rights
by Center for Constitutional Rights
* Tawakkol Kamran, Ezz-Adeen Al-Asbahi, Pardiss Kebriaei & Leili Kashani
On September 2, 2010, at the Brecht Forum in New York City, CCR convened "The United States and Yemen: Destroying Lives in the Name of National Security," a public discussion featuring prominent Yemeni activists and a CCR human rights attorney addressing the human costs and legal consequences of characterizing Yemen as a new frontier in the so-called "War on Terror."
The U.S. government increasingly describes Yemen as "an important partner in the global war on terrorism" while at the same time characterizing it as an Al-Qaida stronghold. In turn, the Yemeni government has taken advantage of the U.S. partnership and increasing military aid to justify its domestic "anti-terror campaigns" which have resulted in egregious human rights violations, including mass arrests, illegal abductions, enforced disappearances, torture, and killings. The victims of this violence are not only alleged militants and their families, but Yemeni dissidents and journalists critical of their government. The "War on Terror" has served as a cover for the Yemeni state to increase repression and militarization in response to its own internal political crises -- all with the tacit approval of the international community.
This video provides an exceptional opportunity to hear visiting Yemeni activists at the forefront of human rights struggles in their country discuss what they are doing to resist this mounting repression and to create a meaningfully democratic and peaceful future, and reflect on what ethical solidarity with Yemeni people might look like. Also hear from a CCR attorney who is trying to stop a "targeted killing" by the United States in Yemen and who represents men at Guantanamo—where Yemeni men constitute the largest group of remaining prisoners, all declared by the Obama administration to be indefinitely detainable without charge based solely on their nationality. Developing an understanding of this political reality is crucial to ending the U.S. government's complicity in more human rights abuses, and to stopping the creation of a boundless war without end that threatens our collective safety.
* This event was co-sponsored by FIDH and the Brecht Forum.
Timeline
On July 23, 2010, CCR and the ACLU submitted an urgent request to OFAC for a license authorizing them to continue to provide pro bono legal services to Nasser Al-Aulaqi as representative of the interests of Anwar Al-Aulaqi.
On August 3, 2010, CCR and the ACLU filed suit against the Department of Treasury and OFAC challenging the legality and constitutionality of the licensing scheme requiring them to obtain a license to continue their representation of Nasser Al-Aulaqi as representative of the interests of Anwar Al-Aulaqi.
On August 4, 2010, OFAC granted CCR and the ACLU a license to represent Nasser Al-Aulaqi.
On August 30, 2010, CCR and the ACLU filed suit on behalf of Dr. Nasser Al-Aulaqi against President Obama, CIA Director Panetta, and Defense Secretary Gates, challenging their decision to authorize the targeted killing of his son, U.S. citizen Anwar Al-Aulaqi, in violation of the Constitution and international law.
On August 30, 2010, CCR and the ACLU also filed a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction asking the court to declare that it is illegal for the government to kill Anwar Al-Aulaqi, unless he is found to present a concrete, imminent threat, and there are no other means besides lethal force that could be used to stop the threat.
On September 25, 2010, the government opposed Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction and moved to dismiss the case arguing that Nasser Al-Aulaqi lacks standing to bring the case, that the issues are political questions not appropriate for judicial review, and that litigation would risk disclosure of “state secrets.”
On October 8, 2010, CCR and the ACLU filed a brief in response to the government’s motion to dismiss and opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction, arguing that Dr. Al-Aulaqi has appropriate standing to assert his son’s constitutional claims, that the determination of those claims present squarelyjusticiable issues, that Dr. Al-Aulaqi has also stated an appropriate claim in his own right under the Alien Tort Statute against the extra-judicial killing of his son, and that “state secrets” do not foreclose litigation of his claims.
Three declarations were submitted in support of the brief and the premise that the targeted killing of Dr. Al-Aulaqi’s son in Yemen would occur outside the context of armed conflict, including from Professor Bernard Haykel of Princeton University addressing factual issues concerning Yemen and Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, and from Professor Mary Ellen O’Connell of Notre Dame University addressing legal issues concerning armed conflict
Attached Files
- Al-Aulaqi v. Obama
- Complaint_08-30-10
- PI Motion_08-30-10
- Wizner Declaration with Exhibits_08-30-10
- Declaration of Dr. Nasser Al-Aulaqi_08-30-10
- Gov't Motion to Dismiss_09-25-10.pdf
- Gov't Memo Opp to Preliminary Injunction and MTD_09-25-10.pdf
- Gov't MTD - Ex 1 - Clapper Decl_09-25-10.pdf
- Gov't MTD - Ex 2 - State Secrets Policy Memo_09-25-10.pdf
- Gov't MTD- Ex 3 - Leiter Testimony_09-25-10.pdf
- Gov't MTD- Ex 4 - Gates Decl_09-25-10.pdf
- Gov't MTD - Ex 5 - Panetta Decl_09-25-10.pdf
- Veterans of Foreign Wars Amicus Brief_10-01-10
- Washington Legal Foundation Amicus Brief_10-04-10
- Plaintiffs' Opp to MTD and MSJ_10-08-2010.pdf
- Declaration of Bernard Haykel_10-08-2010.pdf
- Declaration of Mary Ellen O'Connell_10-08-2010.pdf
- Declaration of Jonathan Manes_10-08-2010.pdf
- Govt's Reply re MTD_10-18-10.pdf
- CCR and the ACLU v. OFAC
source : stewwebb.com
4 comments:
I think one of your advertisements caused my internet browser to resize, you might want to put that on your blacklist.
found your site on del.icio.us today and really liked it.. i bookmarked it and will be back to check it out some more later
Beneficial info and excellent design you got here! I want to thank you for sharing your ideas and putting the time into the stuff you publish! Great work!
Do you people have a facebook fan page? I looked for one on twitter but could not discover one, I would really like to become a fan!
Post a Comment