I do not like to make over-reactive headlines. But my gosh, Senator Rand Paul has been pushing President Obama for weeks whether or not he believes he could use deadly force to kill an American on American soil through drone strikes. Thus blowing past the 4th Amendment right against search and seizures (drones flying overhead), 5th Amendment right to have no loss of life, liberty, or property without Due Process, and the 6th Amendment right to jury trial.
While the President declares that he would likely never do this, he states that “hypothetically” he may kill an American on American soil if he felt it absolutely necessary. Talk about establishing very dangerous precedent. Though the President states he believes his actions are Constitutional, I would say how? As this directly contradicts the 4th through 6th Amendments guarantees. Rights are absolute rights not rights for when they are convenient. Senator Rand Paul stated that this assertion of power doesn’t just limit the President to an imminent circumstance where an American has a rocket launcher on his shoulder about to shoot which most would agree makes sense but the problem deals with where there is no imminent circumstance where a person is perhaps merely planning. The discretion sits solely on the President’s shoulders. However, how can we adequately determine who is actually committing a crime or who is a terrorist without actually putting them on trial? Our 6th amendment guarantees your criminal fate will be determined by a jury of your peers and not the President.
Since 11:45 this morning (its 2:30pm as I write this) Senator Rand Paul began a filibuster to stop the President from appointing his new CIA director until he renounces this power.
I’m just going to post the President’s Letter (written by his Attorney General Eric Holder) written to Rand Paul and let you decide.