According to the Fifth
Amendment of the US Constitution, Americans are never to be deprived of life,
liberty, or property without due process of law. The Constitution is not some
aspirational statement of values, allowing exceptions when convenient, but
rather, it is the law of the land. It is the basis of our Republic and our
principal bulwark against tyranny.
Last week's assassination of
two American citizens, Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan, is an outrage and a
criminal act carried out by the President and his administration. If the law
protecting us against government-sanctioned assassination can be voided when
there is a "really bad American", is there any meaning left to the
rule of law in the United States? If, as we learned last week, a secret
government committee, not subject to congressional oversight or judicial
review, can now target certain Americans for assassination, under what moral
authority do we presume to lecture the rest of the world about protecting
human rights? Didn't we just bomb Libya into oblivion under the auspices of
protecting the civilians from being targeted by their government? Timothy
McVeigh was certainly a threat, as were Nidal Hassan and Jared Lee Loughner.
They killed people in front of many witnesses. They took up arms against
their government in a literal way, yet were still afforded trials. These
constitutional protections are in place because our Founders realized it is a
very serious matter to deprive any individual of life or liberty. Our outrage
against even the obviously guilty is not worth the sacrifice of the rule of
law. Al-Awlaki has been outspoken against the United States and we are told
he encouraged violence against Americans. We do not know that he actually
committed any acts of violence. Ironically, he was once invited to the
Pentagon as part of an outreach to moderate Muslims after 9/11. As the US
attacks against Muslims in the Middle East and Central Asia expanded, it is
said that he became more fervent and radical in his opposition to US foreign
policy.
Many cheer this killing
because they believe that in a time of war, due process is not necessary -
not even for citizens, and especially not for those overseas. However, there
has been no formal declaration of war and certainly not one against Yemen.
The post-9/11 authorization for force would not have covered these two
Americans because no one is claiming they had any connection to that attack.
Al-Awlaki was on a kill list compiled by a secret panel within President
Obama's National Security Council and Justice Department. How many more
Americans citizens are on that list? They won't tell us. What are the
criteria? They won't tell us. Where is the evidence? They won't tell us.
Al-Awlaki's father tried
desperately to get the administration to at least allow his son to have legal
representation to challenge the "kill" order. He was denied. Rather
than give him his day in court, the administration, behind closed doors,
served as prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner.The most worrisome aspect
of this is that any new powers this administration accrues will serve as
precedents for future administrations. Even those who completely trust this
administration must understand that if this usurpation of power and denial of
due process is allowed to stand, these powers will remain to be expanded on
by the next administration and then the next. Will you trust them? History
shows that once a population gives up its rights, they are not easily won
back. Beware.