As the long war drags on, armed drones are increasingly the tool of choice for targeting and killing of individual terror suspects. Supporters argue that the comparatively precise targeting enabled by drones has saved the lives of both soldiers (who need not endanger themselves) and civilians (whose lives are spared by more tightly confined and targeted violence). Meanwhile, detractors criticize not only the legal rationale for targeted killings in general, but also the lack of transparency, limited institutional oversight and lower threshold costs that accompany the American drone program in particular. Especially since the killing of American citizen and extremist cleric Anwar al-Awlaki in 2011, the use of armed drones for targeted killings has come under increased legal scrutiny under both international and domestic U.S. law.
Latest in Targeted Killing: Drones
In a jarring reminder of "the nature of the person" who occupies the Oval Office, the Washington Post reports that President Trump questioned the CIA why it took measures to avoid civilian casualties while conducting a targeted killing.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit today handed down an opinion dismissing a suit filed by the family members of individuals reportedly killed in a U.S. drone strike in Yemen in 2012, which the plaintiffs allege was conducted in violation of domestic and international law. Though the court dismissed the case as presenting a non-justiciable political question, Judge Janice Rogers Brown's concurrence presents a strong criticism of the existing oversight regime for targeted killing.
The opinion is available in full below.
Recent reporting in the Wall Street Journal that President Trump “has given the Central Intelligence Agency secret new authority to conduct drone strikes against suspected terrorists" is causing a lot of hand-wringing. Should it?
In an extensive interview with Jonathan Chait, the president expressed some telling comments on the targeted killing program as the end of his time in office draws near.
The Drone Playbook, presidential accountability, and a reminder of what it means to be a morally serious chief executive.
This document was released yesterday. I haven't read it yet, but it is entitled "Procedures for Approving Direct Action Against Terrorist Targets Located Outside the United States and Areas of Active Hostilities" and appears to be a redacted version of the internal policy document that President Obama issued in connection with his May 23, 2013 speech on drone strikes.
Hot off the press: The new Executive Order concerning pre-strike and post-strike practices and policies is here, ODNI's release of aggregate casaulty information is here, and the official fact sheet concerning them both is
To assess the legality of U.S. targeting, it is crucial to know where the PPG does and does not apply. Yet to date, as commentators have noted, no clear definition has been given for the term that provides the key to this issue.
Just this morning, I was thinking that things have been rather quiet with respect to media coverage of U.S. operations against AQ and AQ affiliates in places like Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia. Well...
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence today released a second set of documents recovered during the raid of Osama bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.