Democrats Refuse Non-Binding Resolution Limiting Presidential Drones against Non-Combatants, Too

I noted earlier that Eric Holder suggested that a law prohibiting the use of drones against non-combatant Americans in the US would be unconstitutional.

Grassley: Do you believe Congress has the Constitutional authority to pass a law prohibiting the President’s authority to use drone aircraft to use lethal force against Americans on US soil and if not, why not?

Holder: I’m not sure that such a bill would be constitutional. It might run contrary to the Article II powers that the President has.

That’s interesting background for a move Rand Paul tried at roughly hour 8 of his filibuster.

He proposed a non-binding resolution saying precisely what Grassley had laid out 10 hour earlier, voicing the position of the Senate to be opposed to the “use of drones to target Americans on American soil who pose no imminent threat.”

As I understand it, the resolution was independent from the Brennan nomination (so it would not disrupt that, aside from a vote).

But — as just one of two Democrats to show up during this filibuster (Ron Wyden showed up in support during the 3:00 hour) — Dick Durbin showed up to oppose Paul’s unanimous consent to call for that resolution.

Durbin promised his subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee would hold a hearing on drones. Nevertheless, he objected to Paul’s resolution. He suggested more Constitutional review of this simple measure was needed.

A leader of the Democratic party (and the President’s fellow Chicagoan) opposed a non-binding resolution prohibiting the use of drones in the US against non-combatants out of Constitutional concerns.

I’ve got a lot of theories why that might be. A belief this is all about making trouble for another nomination. insistence that nothing limit potential Article II claims.

But I keep thinking about the fact that there’s a wrongful death suit out there, with state secrets as the fallback claim crumbling with the public discussion.

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+1Email to someone

9 Responses to Democrats Refuse Non-Binding Resolution Limiting Presidential Drones against Non-Combatants, Too

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
Emptywheel Twitterverse
JimWhiteGNV RT @KendallRogersD1: Boy, #Gators have surged with Peter Alonso back in the lineup. He has two homers today, as #UF leads MSU 5-3 in the 6t…
14mreplyretweetfavorite
JimWhiteGNV .@AllenDeLaney Looks like Alonso picked a good time for his first two homers! #Gators
14mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @ScottGreenfield We need to pass a law against alien hating; alien hating speech must be criminalized. New project for @ma_franks
19mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @JohnFugelsang: Chris Christie failed to pay $152k in taxes and as President he'd send you to jail for smoking weed. Any questions?
22mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Official Leaks: “These Senior People Do Whatever They Want” https://t.co/P5LG8gTy17
1hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @onekade Unlikely it'd be a better movie than @1971Film -- tho it might get disseminated better. @firetomfriedman
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Last tweet was @jackgillum snark here. http://t.co/ayGtinxKLf
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel "Johnson did not respond to f-up Q Sun why Roberts would still be a threat if he couldn't, in fact, compromise United's control systems."
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @kkaplan @ScottGreenfield @radleybalko Well, I'd hope not.... But who knows??
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @DonteStallworth LOL. Spouse's friends always used to refer to him playing "fetch" when discussing ultimate. @RandyMoss
2hreplyretweetfavorite