Targeted Killings

The CIA and the military are carrying out an illegal “targeted killing” program in which people far from any battlefield are determined to be enemies of the state and killed without charge or trial.
 
The executive branch has, in effect, claimed the unchecked authority to put the names of citizens and others on “kill lists” on the basis of a secret determination, based on secret evidence, that a person meets a secret definition of the enemy. The targeted killing program operates with virtually no oversight outside the executive branch, and essential details about the program remain secret, including what criteria are used to put people on CIA and military kill lists or how much evidence is required.
 
Outside of armed conflict zones, the use of lethal force is strictly limited by international law and, when it comes to U.S. citizens, the Constitution. Specifically, lethal force can be used only as a last resort against an imminent threat to life. Even in the context of an armed conflict against an armed group, the government may use lethal force only against individuals who are directly participating in hostilities against the U. S. Regardless of the context, whenever the government uses lethal force, it must take all possible steps to avoid harming civilian bystanders. These are not the standards that the executive branch is using.
 
The U.S. continues to carry out illegal targeted killings in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and elsewhere. The government must be held to account when it carries out such killings in violation of the Constitution and international law.
 
ACLU Litigation
Al-Aulaqi v. Panetta: On July 18, 2012, the ACLU and the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) filed a lawsuit challenging the government’s targeted killing of three U.S. citizens in drone strikes far from any armed conflict zone. The suit charges that the U.S. government’s killings of U.S. citizens Anwar Al-Aulaqi, Samir Khan, and 16-year-old Abdulrahman Al-Aulaqi in Yemen in 2011 violated the Constitution’s fundamental guarantee against the deprivation of life without due process of law. 
 
Freedom of Information Act Cases:
Targeted Killing FOIA: On February 1, 2012, the ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking information about the targeted killings of three U.S. citizens in Yemen in September and October 2011: Anwar al-Awlaki; his 16-year-old son, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki; and Samir Khan. The lawsuit seeks disclosure of the legal memorandum written by the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel that provided justifications for the targeted killing of Anwar al-Aulaqi, as well as records describing the factual basis for the killings of all three Americans. In response, the government has refused to confirm or deny whether it killed these three citizens or even whether the CIA has a targeted killing program, despite numerous statements by U.S. officials to the media about the program.

Drone FOIA: In March 2010, the ACLU filed a FOIA lawsuit demanding that the government disclose basic information about the use of drones to conduct targeted killings. The lawsuit seeks disclosure of the legal basis, scope, and limits on the targeted killing program; information pertaining to the training, supervision, oversight, or discipline of UAV operators and others involved in the decision to execute a targeted killing using a drone; and data about the number of civilians and non-civilians killed in drone strikes. In response, the CIA has refused to even confirm or deny whether it has a drone program. 
 
Al-Majalah Civilian Deaths FOIA: On April 17, 2012, the ACLU and CCR submitted a FOIA request seeking information about a December 2009 U.S. missile strike on a community in the al-Majalah region of the Abyan province of Yemen. The attack, which was the Obama administration's first known missile strike in Yemen, apparently targeted alleged “militants” but killed dozens of civilians, including at least 21 children. The U.S. government has yet to release basic information about the strike.

VIDEO: Surveillance, Secrecy, and Government Accountability

By Amanda Corlett, ACLU at 5:31pm
Last month, ACLU Deputy Legal Director Jameel Jaffer participated in a panel convened by Open Society Foundations in New York City entitled National Security Secrecy and Surveillance: Defending the Public’s Right to Know
 
The conversation, which was moderated by secrecy expert Steven Aftergood, a Senior Research Analyst at the Federation of American

Targeted Killing, Indefinite Detention, and Military Commissions: A Debate About Checks and Balances

By Farbod Faraji, National Security Project at 5:45pm

Earlier this month at Harvard Law School, ACLU Deputy Legal Director Jameel Jaffer and Harvard Law Professor Jack Goldsmith, who in 2003 and 2004 led the Bush administration’s Office of Legal Counsel, debated the legitimacy of controversial national security policies relating to targeted killing, indefinite detention and military commissions. The debate, which was sponsored by the South Asian Law Students Association, was introduced by law student Al-Amyn Sumar and moderated by Professor Dan Meltzer, who served as Principal Deputy Counsel to President Obama in 2009 and 2010.

VIDEO: Report on Drone Strike Civilian Casualties and New Questions About Legality

By Nathan Freed Wessler, Staff Attorney, ACLU Speech, Privacy & Technology Project at 12:00pm

Over the weekend, the UK-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ) and the Sunday Times of London published a detailed and distressing report revealing that under the Obama Administration, CIA drone strikes in Pakistan have repeatedly killed civilians who were attempting to rescue victims of previous drone strikes or were attending funerals of those killed. The investigation found that at least 50 civilians have been killed by follow-up drone strikes while trying to assist victims, and more than 20 civilians were killed in deliberate attacks on funerals. Hundreds more civilians have been killed in other CIA drone strikes in Pakistan.

After Al-Aulaqi's Killing, Why Due Process Matters

By Suzanne Ito, ACLU at 5:04pm

In "Crime or War: Execution or Assassination?" David Shipler of The Shipler Report writes about why due process — even for terrorism suspects who have admitted to plotting against the U.S. — is important:

So, why bother to bring the guilty man in for a fair trial? For thorough truth-finding, one could say, or to uphold the pageantry of constitutional justice, which is a crown jewel of our democracy. To lend unquestioned legitimacy to the ultimate sentence, even if it is death, so the world does not look upon America with repugnance. To keep the trappings of civilized order so that we do not become a vigilante state. To stop ourselves from taking a step down a long slope whose ends might be oppression very different from anything we can now imagine…

Shipler also calls for the Obama administration to reveal the standards under which Americans are placed on the CIA's "kill lists," information we seek in our Predator Drone Freedom of Information Act request and lawsuit. But the government has mostly stonewalled our attempts to uncover basic information about targeted killings.  The CIA refuses to confirm or deny whether it has any records at all relating to targeted killings using drones, even though the CIA’s involvement in the drone program is widely acknowledged.  And other government agencies flatly refuse to release documents explaining the government’s asserted legal basis for conducting targeted killings — including against U.S. citizens — using drones.

Brennan Confirmation Hearing: Time to Focus on Torture and Killing

By Matthew Harwood, Media Relations Associate, ACLU at 9:09am

ACLU Senior Legislative Counsel Chris Anders appeared on “UP with Chris Hayes” Sunday morning for a 40-minute, in-depth discussion of President Obama’s nomination of his counterterrorism advisor John Brennan to run the CIA.

Anders argued the Senate needs to determine whether Brennan implemented policies such as torture, secret prisons, and extraordinary rendition during his time at the CIA during the Bush administration before deciding whether to confirm him to such a vital, and secretive, national security post.

GRAPHIC: How the Government Simultaneously Confirms AND Denies Targeted Killing

By Brett Kaufman, Legal Fellow, ACLU National Security Project at 3:59pm

Today, ProPublica published an important and illuminating news article and accompanying interactive web feature that demonstrates just how duplicitous the government is being regarding the CIA’s targeted killing program.

As we’ve argued in our Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking records about the CIA’s use of drones to carry out targeted killings around the world, the government continues to claim that it can neither confirm nor deny whether it even has a drone-strike program at all, despite the numerous public statements of government officials discussing the CIA’s drone program. This is an untenable position, and next Thursday, we will be making that argument before the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. 

The Government’s Pseudo-Secrecy Snow Job on Targeted Killing

By Nathan Freed Wessler, Staff Attorney, ACLU Speech, Privacy & Technology Project at 11:59am

Just before a midnight deadline on Wednesday, the government filed its legal brief responding to the ACLU’s Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking information about the legal and factual basis for the deaths of three U.S. citizens in targeted killing drone strikes last fall. Our initial reaction to the brief is here, but the government’s position is so remarkable that it warrants further comment.

U.S. Targeted Killings Program: A Dangerous Precedent

By Allison Frankel, ACLU Human Rights Program at 4:55pm

ACLU National Security Project Director Hina Shamsi delivered a statement at the U.N. Human Rights Council today calling on the U.S. government to provide transparency and accountability in its targeted killing program. While noting that targeted killings may be lawful under some exceptional circumstances, Shamsi emphasized that:

White House Confirms Existence of Targeted Killing Program

By Ateqah Khaki at 2:59pm

Today, the New York Times ran an ACLU op-ed about the CIA's misuse of secrecy to withhold information from the public about the agency's targeted killing program, which has so far killed thousands of people, including several Americans.

The piece, penned by ACLU Deputy Legal Director Jameel Jaffer and National Security Project Legal Fellow Nathan Wessler, explains that in ACLU lawsuits about the drone strike program the CIA has consistently taken the position that it can neither confirm nor deny the existence of the program or any records related to it, despite the fact that numerous other government officials have spoken about the program to the public and the press. The op-ed states,

Broad Spectrum of Organizations Support ACLU Legal Fight for Transparency on U.S. Drone Program

By Nathan Freed Wessler, Staff Attorney, ACLU Speech, Privacy & Technology Project at 4:29pm

Today, nine organizations submitted a friend-of-the-court brief in support of the ACLU's Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking records about the CIA's use of drones to carry out targeted killings around the world.  The organizations work on a diverse array of issues that don't always overlap, including international human rights and rule of law, government transparency, investigative journalism, civil liberties and national security policy.  Although some of these groups seldom have occasion to collaborate, they joined together to urge the court to reject the CIA's position that it can't confirm whether it has a drone strike program at all.

Statistics image