Jane Harman Now Targeting Individual CyberTargets with Drone Court

Jane Harman’s advocacy for a drone court suffers from the same problem I touched on here (and will lay out at more length in the next day or so): before you can have a Drone and/or Targeted Killing Court, you need some law the court will apply. Harman seems to envision just applying the standards the Executive — not Congress — came up with, which isn’t how Schoolhouse Rock taught me the government is supposed to work.

Congress, in her model, would just be fully apprised of what goes on in the Drone and/or Targeted Killing Court, not write law to limit what can be approved.

But I’m more interested — alarmed, really — by the way Harman seamlessly adds cybertargeting to her advocacy.

The FISA court, renamed the CT Court, could also oversee drones and cyber. A FISA court application must show that specific individuals are connected to a foreign power – which is defined, in part, as a group engaged in international terrorism. Drone and cyber applications could (1) list the individual/cyber target against whom the lethal operation is directed and (2) submit a finding of probable cause that the individual/cyber target is connected to a foreign power, is in a senior operational capacity and poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States.

Approved applications for drone strikes and cyberattacks would need to be renewed after a certain period, and discontinued if evidence is presented that the targets no longer meet the criteria. [my emphasis]

Granted, it would have been nice if the government had had to go to a court to explain why a publisher like WikiLeaks should be targeted with a persistent DNS attack, assuming that’s what happened. But given that both our FISA targeting and our targeting killing targeting probably allow for far too much abuse of the First Amendment, I’m not convinced the FISA Court would have noted the problem with that incident of prior restraint.

More generally, though, isn’t Harman’s neat inclusion of cyber targeting here a hint that our cyberattacks have gone beyond just Iran and WikiLeaks?

Tweet about this on Twitter8Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook2Google+2Email to someone

15 Responses to Jane Harman Now Targeting Individual CyberTargets with Drone Court

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15

Emptywheel Twitterverse
JimWhiteGNV RT @thekarami: "Our sick children with cancer or multiple sclerosis are paying the price" of sanctions said Iran director Banitemad http:/…
25mreplyretweetfavorite
JimWhiteGNV RT @OKnox: .@ChrisMurphyCT: Congress must vote on taking anti-ISIL strikes to Syria, even if that puts vulnerable Dems in a bind http://t.c…
26mreplyretweetfavorite
JimWhiteGNV But Obama must ask Congress for permission to expand the conflict, the senator says http://t.co/ps30UpiE54 via @YahooNews
1hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @kevinjonheller So, you are with me on Sam Power, but not football? I'll live with that!
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @kevinjonheller Johnny Football is a winner; Jay Cutler is a whiner.
3hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz My go to source for fashion has always been reporters. Obviously they are the lions of style.
4hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @HanniFakhoury Wow. Whatta ya know, actual 4th Amendment law the way it is supposed to work. Go figure.
4hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @gregorydjohnsen: As much as everyone might dislike Congress at the moment it isn't some quaint little body that can be ignored when inc…
4hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @MiriamElder: Obama has 48 days to make his assault on ISIS legal, by AUMF expert @gregorydjohnsen http://t.co/fRnQritC8U
4hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @joanmccarter Yeesh.
9hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @joanmccarter Welp, this is not going very well. #BroncoBlues
9hreplyretweetfavorite
February 2013
S M T W T F S
« Jan   Mar »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
2425262728