Me too. I know it's somewhat hyperbolic, but could this ruling make it possible for the POTUS to order a SEAL team to kill a US citizen?

Sigh.

Go read Peter's other post. It's actually a cogent analysis of what the opinion said. The key piece that you're all forgetting - and don't let me stop a good left wing panic festival here - is the "core" parts of the Job of President.

Barack Obama ordered a drone strike that ended up killing an American citizen. I think you would agree that in getting the terrorist he was after - the kid's father - that the 16 year old was an unfortunate collateral casualty. Would you not agree that taking out terrorists is a perfectly "core" part of a President's job function?

Or would you rather some rogue prosecutor in Florida charge Obama with 1st degree, premeditated murder of an American citizen? Somehow I don't think that's what you want.

This ruling nails it. Presidents can't go around depriving people of life and liberty unless there's an extreme justification for it and this ruling doesn't change that.

Macroeconomic Trends and Risks FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.