Skip to content

Tag Archives: Tennessee v. Garner

Whence Imminence in that Drone Memo? A Puzzle and a Theory

By
Tuesday, June 24, 2014 at 11:19 AM

On May 27, a unanimous Supreme Court—to little notice from just about anyone—handed down a case called Plumhoff v. Rickard, which dealt with a police shooting and a claim of excessive force during a high-speed car chase. Donald Rickard had led police in Arkansas on a highway chase, at the end of which officers shot him and . . .
Read more »

The Al-Aulaqi OLC Memo: A Quick and Dirty Summary

By
Monday, June 23, 2014 at 4:07 PM

I have this feeling that a lot of people are going to mischaracterize the just-released OLC memo on the Anwar Al-Aulaqi strike. Just a guess. So before expressing any opinions on the subject or arguing with anyone about it, I thought I would start things out with a straight summary of the memo, which I am writing . . .
Read more »

In Defense of the Administration on Targeted Killing of Americans

By
Wednesday, February 27, 2013 at 10:00 AM

In writing my testimony for today’s House Judiciary Committee hearing on drones and targeted killing of U.S. citizens overseas, I found myself writing a more complete explication of the essential legal rationale underlying the administration’s position on the subject than I have, to date, set down in one place. Some of it was drawn from . . .
Read more »

Of Course President Obama Has Authority, Under Some Circumstances, to Order Lethal Force Against a U.S. Citizen on U.S. Soil (and a Free Draft Response to Senator Paul for John Brennan)

By
Saturday, February 23, 2013 at 8:12 AM

I noted last week than in his answer to the question whether the Obama administration could “carry out drone strikes inside the United States,” John Brennan gave this non-response: “This Administration has not carried out drone strikes inside the United States and has no intention of doing so.”  Now Senator Paul has followed up in . . .
Read more »

Why a “Drone Court” Won’t Work–But (Nominal) Damages Might…

By
Sunday, February 10, 2013 at 5:12 PM

There’s been a fair amount of buzz over the past few days centered around the idea of a statutory “drone court”–a tribunal modeled after the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) that would (presumably) provide at least some modicum of due process before the government engages in targeted killing operations, but that, like the FISC, would . . .
Read more »

What ACLU and CCR Won in al-Aulaqi

By
Tuesday, December 7, 2010 at 6:32 PM

Judge Bates wrote a solid, careful, and in my view persuasive opinion in al-Aulaqi.  The opinion is clearly a victory for the government.  But it was not without small victories for ACLU, CCR, and others who want to establish judicial limits on presidential targeting authorities.  Consider:

Al Aulaqi – Judge Bates Grants Government’s Dismissal Motion

By
Tuesday, December 7, 2010 at 10:57 AM

Opinion here.  More to come after we’ve had a chance to digest the full opinion. UPDATE:  Below are selected excerpts from the opinion (footnotes omitted). Excerpt from introduction: This is a unique and extraordinary case. Both the threshold and merits issues present fundamental questions of separation of powers involving the proper role of the courts . . .
Read more »