Udall: Justify Drone Strikes on U.S. Terror Suspects

“It’s Congress’ job to conduct oversight into these matters, and I believe in strongly exercising that responsibility,” Udall told the Journal on Tuesday. “The Justice Department’s legal justification for an extraordinary authority – to kill American citizens in the course of counterterrorism operations – must be subject to rigorous oversight and scrutiny.”

UDALL: Justice subject to “rigorous oversight”

Eight Democrats and three Republicans sent the letter to President Barack Obama this week in advance of Thursday’s confirmation hearing of John Brennan, Obama’s nominee to head the CIA.

The letter acknowledges the president has the authority to order the killing of an American who would “choose to take up arms” against his own country, but the letter presses for clarification.

Meanwhile, NBC News late Monday obtained a Justice Department document that shows the Obama administration has been operating under more lenient rules than publicly known for when drone attacks can be launched against U.S. citizens.

Evidence that a specific attack is imminent isn’t necessary, only that the targeted suspect is involved in ongoing plotting against the United States, the Justice Department document said.

The memo says postponing strikes against U.S. citizens linked to al-Qaida would create an unacceptably high risk because the terror network is continually plotting attacks on the U.S. and the American government may not always be aware of each plot.

Udall told the Journal that the memo already had been provided to Congress and it didn’t answer enough questions.

“The administration provided it to Congress instead of the complete Justice Department legal opinions we have requested,” Udall said. “In order to properly evaluate the legal justification for targeting Americans, we need the complete DOJ opinions.”

Supported attack

At the time of al-Awlaki’s death, Udall and the entire New Mexico delegation said they supported his killing.

Sen. Martin Heinrich, a New Mexico Democrat who sits on the Senate Intelligence Committee, didn’t sign the letter, but his spokeswoman said he also would like to see more justification for the policy.

“Sen. Heinrich believes the administration should provide the Intelligence Committees with any legal opinions that would permit the use of lethal force against U.S. citizens,” said Heinrich spokeswoman Whitney Potter. “Sen. Heinrich looks forward to hearing more from John Brennan on this matter during his confirmation hearing on Thursday.

Then-Rep. Heinrich defended the killing of al-Awlaki at the time, calling it “one of the most significant eliminations of a real terrorist in the last 10 years.”

“The law is fairly clear that authorizes this,” Heinrich said in a Journal interview at that time. “It’s a presidential directive, and it’s limited to a very small number of people who are a threat, and an active threat not only to our country, but American citizens. We’re talking about someone who was very involved in a plot to kill a number of Americans.”

On Tuesday, White House press secretary Jay Carney deflected questions about legal justifications for the drone policy, repeatedly noting that he wasn’t a lawyer.

“He (Obama) takes his responsibility in conducting the war against al-Qaida as authorized by Congress in a way that is fully consistent with our Constitution and all the applicable laws,” Carney said.

Carney also said the drone strikes are executed with surgical precision and planned in a way to avoid loss of innocent lives.

“These strikes are legal, they are ethical and they are wise,” Carney said.

The letter from the senators said it is important for Congress and the American public to have a full understanding of how the executive branch interprets the limits and boundaries of this authority and decide “whether the president’s power to deliberately kill American citizens is subject to appropriate limitations and safeguards.”

Udall added, “We saw this under the previous administration with the issues of detainee interrogation methods and extraordinary renditions. And I believe that every administration must be held accountable, regardless of which party controls the White House.”

Udall and Sen. Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, have worked closely on issues related to the Patriot Act and foreign surveillance, and decided to initiate the letter requesting more information from the White House on drone killings, according to Udall’s office.

Legal critics

Some constitutional law scholars are appalled by the White House’s justification for the killings.

Marjorie Cohn, professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and former president of the National Lawyers Guild, told the Journal in an email Tuesday that public pressure could mount against the policy if more people are informed of its use.

“The more people talk about this outrage where the president can order the execution of U.S. citizens with no due process, based only on vague and nebulous standards, the more pressure the White House will feel,” Cohn said in an email. “However, judging from Obama’s predecessor, the most effective pressure is a ruling of the Supreme Court telling the president that, in (former) Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s words, ‘A state of war is not a blank check for the president when it comes to the rights of the nation’s citizens.’ ”
— This article appeared on page A1 of the Albuquerque Journal