New boss....

[nancylebov]

Obama claims unchecked authority to kill any American And yes, there is some harm in asking.

Link thanks to twistedchick.

Comments

[madfilkentist]

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.

Bush went to a tanning salon and never left the White House. That's the only explanation.

[nancylebov.livejournal.com]

If we can allow for that degree of changing appearance, then perhaps Obama has been President all along. Or it's a committee. Or (though this might take slightly better tech) it's a Lizard.

[zenlizard]

Let me be the first to welcome our new reptilian overlords.

[richardthinks.livejournal.com]

why that was exactly the paragraph I was going to quote. I'm not even sure what it means, a "political question" that should not be subject to judicial review. Aren't all questions "political"? Is it, perhaps, a legislative question? It seems probable to me that it's a constitutional one.

[subnumine.livejournal.com]

A "political question" is, in theory, one that the Constitution gives Congress or the President authority to decide, answerable to the voters. In practice, since Marbury v. Madison, it has often been one where the Court chooses to duck, usually because sticking its collective neck out might get the Court itself into trouble. This pdf (https://www.jagcnet.army.mil/JAGCNETInternet/Homepages/AC/MilitaryLawReview.nsf/20a66345129fe3d885256e5b00571830/d471dd1e07eb949d85257672004463bc/$FILE/Article%202%20-%20By%20MAJ%20Chad%20C.%20Carter.pdf) has much more, and is on the "War on Terror".

[whswhs.livejournal.com]

"The bearer of this letter has acted under my orders and for the good of the state."

[thedailyg.wordpress.com (from livejournal.com)]

Quote:

"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.

**********

How can anyone argue against THAT!? I guess the answer is: it doesn't mean anything.