Drones must not be used on U.S. citizens
As more details of the DOJ Whitepaper come to light, the memo in regard the legality of drone strikes against American citizens, the little publicized nomination of John Brennan to be CIA director has become a major issue worthy of concern among citizens.
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, has taken a stand against this encroachment of Constitutional rights, along with five other senators, including Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon. At the time this letter is being written, Sen. Paul is filibustering the nomination of Mr. Brennan, to proclaim his disagreement with the Obama Administration’s position that drone assassinations of American citizens, while on American soil are legal.
Our Constitution requires that no citizen can be ”deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” Does the Presidential Oath of Office state that the president is to ”preserve, protect and defend the Constitution as long as it is convenient?”
No, the Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land and does not allow for exceptions to broaden the power of the government to ignore our basic rights to kill American citizens without due process.
Where does this end? What if, in five, or 10, or 20 years, an American president decides that all of his political enemies are potential threats? Will the United States become a police state where citizens are assassinated at the whim of the government?
No president or bureaucrat, regardless of party, can ignore our fundamental rights and kill an American citizen without the constitutionally mandated due process of law guaranteed under the 5th Amendment. The Constitution was written to protect citizens from government. The 8th Amendment also protects us from cruel and unusual punishments.
The Supreme Court ruled in Kennedy v. Louisiana that the death penalty for tried and convicted child rapists is in violation of the 8th Amendment. Does not that protection apply to the assassination of an American citizen via drone on the mere suspicion of terrorism?
This policy is in violation of at least two amendments of the Constitution, and thus I applaud Sen. Paul for his courage on this issue.