Holder: drone strikes on citizens in U.S Legal

[August]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Unfortunately, the Supreme Court probably won't issue certiorari until after a US Citizen has already been killed.

Unfortunately, Original Jurisdiction of the SCotUS does not apply here.
Any judicial review of this Executive Branch decision would have to be heard in a US District Court first, and until someone has standing, the district courts won't accept the case.

In the United States, properly enacted laws and regulations are presumed to be constitutional until it is demonstrated in court that it is not.

As I understand it obtaining standing sufficient to bring a case can be difficult to obtain. Just having your rights violated isn't enough, there has to be some measurable negative consequences.

IE a law that violates someones right to free speech cannot be challenged unless it has been used to actually deny someone from speaking.

[Platapus]

Absolutely correct. There has to be measurable damages.

I would imagine having a drone missile up family member's butt would qualify.... after the fact.

If I were king, we would have automatic judicial review for constitutionality with the understanding that there is a huge difference between the constitutionality of a law and the constitutionality of the implementation of the law.

Challenges for implementation must wait for actual damages, but a judicial review of the constitutionality of the law should, in my opinion, be allowed prior to any damages. Actually, I feel strongly that it SHOULD occur before any damages, not after.

But last time I looked, I ain't king.

[August]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Absolutely correct. There has to be measurable damages.

I would imagine having a drone missile up family member's butt would qualify.... after the fact.

If I were king, we would have automatic judicial review for constitutionality with the understanding that there is a huge difference between the constitutionality of a law and the constitutionality of the implementation of the law.

Challenges for implementation must wait for actual damages, but a judicial review of the constitutionality of the law should, in my opinion, be allowed prior to any damages. Actually, I feel strongly that it SHOULD occur before any damages, not after.

But last time I looked, I ain't king.

I'm glad we don't have a king but I agree 100% with you in this.