For those reading about the apparent legality of killing Americans with drone strikes, something does not ring true. Something feels unconstitutional or improper about the President’s non-public sanctioning of an American citizen with extreme prejudice.
- Why couldn’t the Obama Administration have approached a judge – presenting evidence that the Americans in question were affiliated with al Qaeda and then sought to revoke their American citizenship?
- Giving them a public notice and 90 days to appear before a consular officer or suitable official to contest the revocation of their citizenship?
- And then declaring them non-citizens and waxing their sorry treasonous asses with a drone strike?
The problem …
Article 3, Section 3 of the Constitution provides … “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.”
Therefore, provide the suspect with sufficient legal notice that they are about to lose their citizenship, make the suspected terrorist produce valid reasons why they should not be stripped of their citizenship in a court of competent jurisdiction. If they surrender to the court, they are now in custody and further legal proceedings continue. If they are unwilling to defend their citizenship and it can be proven in a court of law (with an appointed legal representative) that they have acted illegally to aid and abet the enemy, then revoke their citizenship and sanction them.
There must be a legal and constitutional way to sanction treasonous activities – and not one that relies on the President’s sole determination.
President Obama purports to be a Constitutional Scholar and Attorney General Eric Holder is the highest law enforcement official in the land, so why didn't they follow a procedure that protects and preserves the Constitution of the United States?