Quantcast
Connect with us

Federal appeals court orders Justice Dept. to release ‘white paper’ on drone program

Published

on

By Jonathan Stempel

NEW YORK (Reuters) – A federal appeals court ordered the U.S. Department of Justice to turn over key portions of a memorandum justifying the government’s targeted killing of people linked to terrorism, including Americans.

ADVERTISEMENT

In a case pitting executive power against the public’s right to know what its government does, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court ruling preserving the secrecy of the legal rationale for the killings, such as the death of U.S. citizen Anwar al-Awlaki in a 2011 drone strike in Yemen.

Ruling for the New York Times, a unanimous three-judge panel said the government waived its right to secrecy by making repeated public statements justifying targeted killings.

These included a Justice Department “white paper,” as well as speeches or statements by officials like Attorney General Eric Holder and former Obama administration counterterrorism adviser John Brennan, endorsing the practice.

The Times and two reporters, Charlie Savage and Scott Shane, sought the memorandum under the federal Freedom of Information Act, saying it authorized the targeting of al-Awlaki, a cleric who joined al Qaeda’s Yemen affiliate and directed many attacks.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Whatever protection the legal analysis might once have had has been lost by virtue of public statements of public officials at the highest levels and official disclosure of the DOJ White Paper,” Circuit Judge Jon Newman wrote for the appeals court panel in New York.

He said it was no longer logical or plausible to argue that disclosing the legal analysis could jeopardize military plans, intelligence activities or foreign relations.

The court redacted a portion of the memorandum on intelligence gathering, as well as part of its own decision. It is unclear when the memorandum or the full 2nd Circuit decision might be made public, or whether the government will appeal.

ADVERTISEMENT

Allison Price, a Justice Department spokeswoman, said the department had no comment on the decision.

David McCraw, a lawyer for the Times, said the newspaper is delighted with the decision, saying it encourages public debate on an important foreign policy and national security issue.

“The court reaffirmed a bedrock principle of democracy: The people do not have to accept blindly the government’s assurances that it is operating within the bounds of the law; they get to see for themselves the legal justification that the government is working from,” McCraw said in a statement.

ADVERTISEMENT

Senators Patrick Leahy and Charles Grassley, the Democratic chairman and ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, have also been seeking the legal rationale, and Grassley on Monday urged the Justice Department to start preparing to turn it over.

ALICE IN WONDERLAND

Monday’s decision largely reversed a January 2013 ruling by U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon in Manhattan.

ADVERTISEMENT

She ruled for the administration despite skepticism over its antiterrorism program, including whether it could unilaterally authorize killings outside a “hot” field of battle.

“The Alice-in-Wonderland nature of this pronouncement is not lost on me,” she wrote.

Civil liberties groups have complained that the drone program, which deploys pilotless aircraft, lets the government kill Americans without constitutionally required due process.

ADVERTISEMENT

FOIA requests at issue in the 2nd Circuit case also focused on drone strikes that killed two other U.S. citizens: al-Awlaki’s teenage son, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, and Samir Khan, who was an editor of Inspire, an English-language al Qaeda magazine.

McMahon ruled one month before the Justice Department released the white paper, which set out conditions before lethal force in foreign countries against U.S. citizens could be used.

The conditions are that a top U.S. official must decide a target “poses an imminent threat of violent attack” against the United States, the target cannot be captured, and any operation would be “consistent with applicable law of war principles.”

ADVERTISEMENT

In a March 5, 2012 speech at Northwestern University, Holder had said it was “entirely lawful” to target people with senior operational roles in al-Qaeda and associated forces.

The Times has said the strategy of targeted killings had first been contemplated by the Bush administration, soon after the September 11, 2001 attacks.

On April 4, U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer in Washington dismissed a lawsuit against the government by the families of those killed in the drone strikes, saying senior officials cannot be personally liable for money damages “for conducting war.”

ADVERTISEMENT

The American Civil Liberties Union supported the Times’ appeal. It said that in light of Monday’s decision, it plans in lower court proceedings to force the government to disclose other documents related to targeted killings.

“This is a resounding rejection of the government’s effort to use secrecy and selective disclosure to manipulate public opinion about the targeted killing program,” ACLU Deputy Legal Director Jameel Jaffer said in a statement.

The case is New York Times Co et al v. U.S. Department of Justice et al, 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Nos. 13-422, 13-445.

ADVERTISEMENT

(Additional reporting by Mark Hosenball in Washington and David Ingram in New York; Editing by Jonathan Oatis

[Image via Agence France-Presse]

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. Like you, we here at Raw Story believe in the power of progressive journalism — and we’re investing in investigative reporting as other publications give it the ax. Raw Story readers power David Cay Johnston’s DCReport, which we've expanded to keep watch in Washington. We’ve exposed billionaire tax evasion and uncovered White House efforts to poison our water. We’ve revealed financial scams that prey on veterans, and legal efforts to harm workers exploited by abusive bosses. We’ve launched a weekly podcast, “We’ve Got Issues,” focused on issues, not tweets. And unlike other news outlets, we’ve decided to make our original content free. But we need your support to do what we do.

Raw Story is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. We’re not part of a conglomerate, or a project of venture capital bros. From unflinching coverage of racism, to revealing efforts to erode our rights, Raw Story will continue to expose hypocrisy and harm. Unhinged from billionaires and corporate overlords, we fight to ensure no one is forgotten.

We need your support to keep producing quality journalism and deepen our investigative reporting. Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Invest with us in the future. Make a one-time contribution to Raw Story Investigates, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click to donate by check.

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. Like you, we here at Raw Story believe in the power of progressive journalism — and we’re investing in investigative reporting as other publications give it the ax. Raw Story readers power David Cay Johnston’s DCReport, which we've expanded to keep watch in Washington. We’ve exposed billionaire tax evasion and uncovered White House efforts to poison our water. We’ve revealed financial scams that prey on veterans, and efforts to harm workers exploited by abusive bosses. We’ve launched a weekly podcast, “We’ve Got Issues,” focused on issues, not tweets. Unlike other news sites, we’ve decided to make our original content free. But we need your support to do what we do.

Raw Story is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. We’re not part of a conglomerate, or a project of venture capital bros. From unflinching coverage of racism, to revealing efforts to erode our rights, Raw Story will continue to expose hypocrisy and harm. Unhinged from corporate overlords, we fight to ensure no one is forgotten.

We need your support to keep producing quality journalism and deepen our investigative reporting. Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Invest with us in the future. Make a one-time contribution to Raw Story Investigates, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you.



Report typos and corrections to: [email protected]. Send news tips to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Facebook

Prince Andrew’s fate in potential Epstein lawsuit entirely in the hands of Donald Trump

Published

on

MSNBC legal analyst Danny Cevallos said President Donald Trump has a unique ability to tip the scales in one possible legal case related to sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.

The "Morning Joe" contributor was discussing the latest developments in the case, after Epstein's death earlier this month in jail -- two days after signing a new will.

"You can't hold the attorneys liable because someone wants to prepare a will," Cevallos said, "but remember, they fought to take him off suicide watch and they had to say he's not a suicide risk. otherwise, they would have kept him on suicide watch."

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Internet cheers ‘real president’ Hillary Clinton for ‘eviscerating’ Trump over lie Google ‘manipulated’ millions of votes

Published

on

Hillary Clinton has been pretty quiet lately, perhaps sitting in her Chappaqua home with Bill and doing whatever it is former Secretaries of State and former Presidents do.

But a tweet President Donald Trump posted Monday move her to enter the spotlight once again, if only for a moment.

Trump posted a huge lie, a claim that somehow search and advertising behemoth Google "manipulated" up to 16 million more votes for Hillary Clinton. It's so preposterous that it's already been debunked, but don't expect a Trump retraction.

"Wow, Report Just Out! Google manipulated from 2.6 million to 16 million votes for Hillary Clinton in 2016 Election! This was put out by a Clinton supporter, not a Trump Supporter! Google should be sued. My victory was even bigger than thought!" Trump tweeted.

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

Trump’s outrageous claims of voter fraud have a clear goal: Refusing to accept defeat in 2020

Published

on

A brand new Fox News poll shows Donald Trump well behind the top four Democratic candidates for president, with Joe Biden topping the list at 12 points ahead of Trump. Don’t get happy, though, or else we “tempt the wrath of whatever from high atop the thing,” to quote "The West Wing." We’re still a long way from the 2020 election and roughly a gazillion things could dramatically alter the landscape of the campaign.

Trump, on the other hand, is totally losing his shpadoinkle over the poll results.

Continue Reading
 
 

Thank you for whitelisting Raw Story!

As a special thank you, from now until August 31st, we're offering you a discounted rate of $5.99/month to subscribe and get ad-free access. We're honored to have you as a reader. Thank you. :) —Elias, Membership Coordinator
LEARN MORE
close-link
close-image