Wednesday, December 13, 2017
Opinion

Detailed legal position on terrorists is needed

A memo that became public Monday purportedly lays out the Obama administration's legal justification for using force against certain U.S. citizens involved with al-Qaida.

The unsigned and undated Justice Department document offers important insight into the legal architecture of the overall U.S. effort against terrorists, but it hardly answers all the questions. In a way, the memo addresses only the easy case; that is, an American serving as a senior al-Qaida leader actively involved in plotting terrorism against the United States.

The memo mainly sticks to well-accepted concepts of self-defense, such as the requirement of an "imminent" threat. Furthermore, it says the United States must show capture to be "infeasible," something that is more of a law enforcement concept than something adversaries in the midst of war necessarily have a legal right to expect.

In fact, the memo seems to be more oriented toward a human rights law approach than what international humanitarian law — called the law of armed conflict in the United States — might require. Under the law of armed conflict, there is no obligation before using lethal force to find that enemy combatants are about to strike. Nor is it legally necessary to try to capture them. Yet the memo imposes such restrictions.

In armed conflict, combatants can be attacked at any time and wherever found. Status as a "senior operational leader" is not a targeting requirement either. For example, foot soldiers can be lawfully bombed even as they sleep in their barracks away from their weapons.

Ironically, as the memo notes, the United States has long insisted it is in an armed conflict with al-Qaida — something, incidentally, al-Qaida has never denied. Under the law of armed conflict, this means that those members of an organized armed group like al-Qaida who are involved in continuous combat — including plotting terrorist acts — can be struck without warning, just like any other combatant in war.

Accordingly, it would have been better if the memo had clearly set forth the independent arguments that separately exist under the law of armed conflict and international human rights law, and to have better separated what law requires and what is merely wise policy.

Those who believe that imminent threat is required before killing a combatant in war will complain about the memo's seeming broadening of the concept of imminence. However, in light of the kind of threat 21st century terrorists present, the memo's incorporation of the relevant "window of opportunity," the need to limit civilian casualties, and the gravity of the threat all seem to be reasonable factors in making the determination.

The memo's analysis of domestic law is plausible but depends on a clear understanding of what "al-Qaida and associated forces" means today, as used in Congress' authorization to use force. Terrorists don't necessarily organize themselves in neat diagrams, and that complicates determining precise relationships with finality. While the president has the authority to act in the nation's self-defense, this does make the analysis under domestic law more vulnerable to debate.

Critics will also complain that U.S. citizens who take up arms against this country should somehow be more legally privileged than lawful combatants in war who happen not to be U.S. citizens. Actually, if you become a combatant against the United States, the courts have generally held you are subject to the same consequences — including lethal attacks — to which any enemy combatant is subject, regardless of citizenship.

All in all, the memo is helpful. It plainly contradicts the accusation that attacks are being conducted without any legal analysis. But any legal memo is only as good as the facts applied to it. We will continue to see arguments about access to, and the sufficiency of, the supporting evidence, and whether there is adequate vetting and oversight of it.

Moreover, the administration's piecemeal approach of revealing its legal rationale for strikes against various terrorists is problematic. Public comments by a variety of senior officials, as well as the disclosure of documents like this, seem aimed at retaining some measure of official deniability, depending on public and international reaction.

What is now needed is a formal, detailed and comprehensive U.S. legal position. This recent memo could be a part of that, but there needs to be something that addresses the full range of terrorist threats, not just those posed by American citizens serving as senior al-Qaida operational leaders.

Charles Dunlap Jr. is a Duke Law School professor and the executive director of Duke's Center on Law, Ethics and National Security. He is a former deputy judge advocate general of the Air Force. This is exclusive in Florida to the Tampa Bay Times.

Comments
Editorial: Tax cuts arenít worth harm to Tampa Bay

Editorial: Tax cuts arenít worth harm to Tampa Bay

As congressional negotiators hammer out the details on an enormous, unnecessary tax cut, the potential negative impact on Tampa Bay and Florida is becoming clearer. The harmful consequences stretch far beyond adding more than $1.4 trillion to the fed...
Published: 12/12/17

Another voice: Privacy in the internet age

How much information about you is on your cellphone? Likely the most intimate details of your life: photographs, internet searches, text and email conversations with friends and colleagues. And though you might not know it, your phone is constantly c...
Published: 12/10/17
Updated: 12/11/17
Editorial: Grand jury could force reforms of juvenile justice system

Editorial: Grand jury could force reforms of juvenile justice system

Confronted with documentation of sanctioned brutality and sexual abuse in Floridaís juvenile detention centers, the reaction from Gov. Rick Scottís administration was defensive and obtuse. So itís welcome news that Miami-Dade State Attorney Katherine...
Published: 12/08/17
Updated: 12/11/17

Editorial: U.S. House sides with NRA over stateís rights on concealed weapons permits

With the horror of the mass shootings at a Las Vegas country music concert and a small Texas church still fresh, the U.S. House finally has taken action on guns. But the bill it passed last week wonít make Americans safer from gun violence. It is an ...
Published: 12/07/17
Editorial: Hillsborough cannot afford pay raises for teachers

Editorial: Hillsborough cannot afford pay raises for teachers

There is no satisfaction for anyone in the standoff over pay raises between the Hillsborough County School District and its teachers. Most teachers across the nation already are underpaid, but this district simply cannot afford the raises teachers ex...
Published: 12/07/17
Editorial: Impact of Water Street project extends beyond buildings

Editorial: Impact of Water Street project extends beyond buildings

With a buildout of $3 billion encompassing entire city blocks, itís obvious that Jeff Vinikís plans will change the look and feel of downtown Tampa. But the Tampa Bay Lightning owner unveiled a broader vision last week that reflects how far the impac...
Published: 12/06/17
Updated: 12/08/17
Editorial: Make texting while driving a primary offense

Editorial: Make texting while driving a primary offense

It is dangerous and illegal to text while driving in Florida, and police should be able to pull over and ticket those lawbreakers without witnessing another violation first. House Speaker Richard Corcoran has lent his powerful voice to legislation th...
Published: 12/06/17
Updated: 12/07/17

Editorial: Outsourcing common sense on St. Petersburg Pier naming rights

St. Petersburg officials predict that selling the naming rights to parts of the new Pier could generate $100,000 in annual revenue. But first the city wants to pay a consultant to tell it how and to whom to sell the rights. Why do city officials need...
Published: 12/06/17
Updated: 12/07/17

Another voice: Trumpís risky move

President Donald Trumpís decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israelís capital has a certain amount of common sense on its side. As a practical matter, West Jerusalem has been the seat of Israeli government since 1949, and no conceivable formula for Pa...
Published: 12/06/17
Updated: 12/07/17
Editorial: Tampaís MOSI reinvents itself

Editorial: Tampaís MOSI reinvents itself

A tactical retreat and regrouping seems to be paying off for Hillsborough Countyís Museum of Science and Industry. After paring back its operations, the museum posted a small profit over the past year, enabling the attraction to keep its doors open a...
Published: 12/05/17
Updated: 12/07/17