The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution each contain a due process clause that acts as a safegaurd against the arbitrary denial of one's rights to life, liberty, and property by the government. I can think of nothing more arbitrary than President Obama asserting that he alone has the right to determine if certain Americans do not deserve the rights the Constitution grants to all citizens.
The Fifth Amendment provides:
(N)or shall any person.... be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.
The Fourteenth Amendment provides:
(N)or shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.
The Eighth Amendment to the Constitution guarantees reliable procedures that protect innocent people from being executed, which has been construed as cruel and unusual punishment.
From this stand point much of both George W. Bush's and Barack Obama's War on Terror is in violation of our Constitutional rights as citizens and nothing seems more tyranical than deciding you have the power to execute those you alone deem to be a threat than the contention by Barack Obama and the DOJ (Department of Justice) that Obama has this decision making power. Obama has asserted he alone has the power of life and death for those he designates in secret to be a significant enough threat they need to be killed immediately with no checks or balances on this decision and no judicial review.
Lawyers at DOJ provide no legal, factual, or rational basis for this power except the sort of Wal-Mart School of Law justifications John Yoo gave George W. Bush for torture and rendition, also violations of our Constitution and International Law.
A nation of Laws cannot have exceptions based on political whims and desires for enhanced executive power. All of us have examples of the political reality that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely that we can supply for why this power should not be granted in the first place, even to a leader we believe we can trust.
The gutless, cowardly, unprincipled hacks in Congress and elsewhere who call themselves Democrats, cheer for Obama's civil liberties and human rights abuses with as much vehemence as they attacked Bush for lesser violations. This gives Obama the cover to push his imperial presidency even further by demanding even more power to be vested in the executive branch.
During President Obama's increasingly imperial reign, in addition to restricting excercise of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment, he has also eroded the free speech and assembly rights of citizens contained in the First Amendment as well as demanding redress of grievances with HR. 347, sometimes dubbed the Anti-Occupy Bill. His renewed Patriot Act restricts our freedom from unreasonable search and seizure by enabling increased warrantless spying on citizens without judicial review as originally required under the Fourth Amendment.
The NDAA Act contains provisions that allow for the indefinite detention of Americans in violation of Habeas Corpus, among other things. The definition of terrorist in these measures is certainly open ended enough that it can be construed to mean protesters and political opposition of the president.
Lets assume that there is a rational basis for Democrats belief in Obama's trust worthiness besides stupid Kool-Aid drinking conformity, the problem would be that now that this power has been granted to this president that means all future presidents as well. Imagine a Richard Nixon with this power and you might begin to grasp the consequences for American Democracy and the Rule of Law.
Using Anwar al-Awlaki, who was an American citizen we killed in Pakistan under Obama's claim of legal execution, the government claimed al-Awlaki was a high ranking member of Al Quaida. No substantive proof was ever given by the Government so the question becomes how do we really know? This is why we have the legal system to discern the truth and pass judgement.
The killing of innocent people is murder. All Americans are considered innocent until proven guilty with no exceptions even for the most heinous of crimes. Murder would certainly fall under the high crimes and misdemeanor requirement for impeachment would it not?
With each kill list death Obama has killed another innocent person because they have not been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law only by arbitrary designation in secret. Either these rights are inalienable as the Constitution intended or they are granted by an increasingly imperial president and are meaningless but it can't be both when convienient.
Comments