Targeting Americans: The Constitutionality of the U.S. Drone War
Targeting Americans: The Constitutionality of the U.S. Drone War focuses on the legal debate surrounding drone strikes, the use of which has expanded significantly under the Obama Presidency as part of the continuing war against terror. Despite the political salience of the legal questions raised by targeted killing, the author asserts that there has been remarkably little careful analysis of the fundamental legal question: the constitutionality of the policy.

From a position of deep practical expertise in constitutional issues, Prof. Powell provides a dispassionate and balanced analysis of the issues posed by U.S. targeted killing policy, using the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki in September 2011 as a focus for discussion. While Powell concludes that the al-Awlaki strike was constitutional under 2001 legislation, he rejects the Obama administration's broader claims of authority for its drone policies. Furthermore, he argues, citizens acting as combatants in al-Qaeda and associated groups are not entitled to due process protections: by due process standards, the administration's procedures are legally inadequate.

A fundamental theme of the book is that the conclusion that an action or policy is constitutional should not be confused with claims about its wisdom, morality, or legality under international norms. Part of the purpose of constitutional analysis is to draw attention to these other normative concerns and not, as is too often the case, to occlude them.
"1123118657"
Targeting Americans: The Constitutionality of the U.S. Drone War
Targeting Americans: The Constitutionality of the U.S. Drone War focuses on the legal debate surrounding drone strikes, the use of which has expanded significantly under the Obama Presidency as part of the continuing war against terror. Despite the political salience of the legal questions raised by targeted killing, the author asserts that there has been remarkably little careful analysis of the fundamental legal question: the constitutionality of the policy.

From a position of deep practical expertise in constitutional issues, Prof. Powell provides a dispassionate and balanced analysis of the issues posed by U.S. targeted killing policy, using the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki in September 2011 as a focus for discussion. While Powell concludes that the al-Awlaki strike was constitutional under 2001 legislation, he rejects the Obama administration's broader claims of authority for its drone policies. Furthermore, he argues, citizens acting as combatants in al-Qaeda and associated groups are not entitled to due process protections: by due process standards, the administration's procedures are legally inadequate.

A fundamental theme of the book is that the conclusion that an action or policy is constitutional should not be confused with claims about its wisdom, morality, or legality under international norms. Part of the purpose of constitutional analysis is to draw attention to these other normative concerns and not, as is too often the case, to occlude them.
68.0 In Stock
Targeting Americans: The Constitutionality of the U.S. Drone War

Targeting Americans: The Constitutionality of the U.S. Drone War

Targeting Americans: The Constitutionality of the U.S. Drone War

Targeting Americans: The Constitutionality of the U.S. Drone War

Hardcover

$68.00 
  • SHIP THIS ITEM
    Qualifies for Free Shipping
  • PICK UP IN STORE
    Check Availability at Nearby Stores

Related collections and offers


Overview

Targeting Americans: The Constitutionality of the U.S. Drone War focuses on the legal debate surrounding drone strikes, the use of which has expanded significantly under the Obama Presidency as part of the continuing war against terror. Despite the political salience of the legal questions raised by targeted killing, the author asserts that there has been remarkably little careful analysis of the fundamental legal question: the constitutionality of the policy.

From a position of deep practical expertise in constitutional issues, Prof. Powell provides a dispassionate and balanced analysis of the issues posed by U.S. targeted killing policy, using the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki in September 2011 as a focus for discussion. While Powell concludes that the al-Awlaki strike was constitutional under 2001 legislation, he rejects the Obama administration's broader claims of authority for its drone policies. Furthermore, he argues, citizens acting as combatants in al-Qaeda and associated groups are not entitled to due process protections: by due process standards, the administration's procedures are legally inadequate.

A fundamental theme of the book is that the conclusion that an action or policy is constitutional should not be confused with claims about its wisdom, morality, or legality under international norms. Part of the purpose of constitutional analysis is to draw attention to these other normative concerns and not, as is too often the case, to occlude them.

Product Details

ISBN-13: 9780190492847
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Publication date: 04/13/2016
Pages: 264
Product dimensions: 5.60(w) x 8.30(h) x 1.10(d)

About the Author

H. Jefferson Powell is Professor of Law at Duke University. He is a prolific legal scholar and has written extensively on how constitutional concerns bear on other legal fields such as intellectual property and national security. He has taken sabbaticals from teaching during the Clinton and Obama administrations to serve as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel and Principal Deputy Solicitor General.

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One
The Constitutional History of the War on Terror

Chapter Two
How to Think Constitutionally

Chapter Three
The War Powers of the United States Government

Chapter Four
The Killing of Anwar al-Awlaki: A Constitutional Analysis

Chapter Five
Targeted Killing and the Future: Three Speculations

Conclusion

Index
From the B&N Reads Blog

Customer Reviews