IS NODEFENDER LEGIT FULL
The government can try to appeal the ruling through the full appeals court or the Supreme Court. Her decision, however, came a month before the DOJ released its white paper, which outlined the legal justification for the strikes. At the time, Judge Colleen McMahon questioned the legality of drone strikes, but said the government did not violate the Constitution by keeping those documents secret. The decision on Monday reverses a January 2013 ruling by the Federal District Court in Manhattan. Newman added that the plaintiffs’ lawsuits do not challenge the legality of drone attacks, but rather they seek information about the targeted killings. The government had denied Freedom of Information Act requests by the plaintiffs, and the case focuses on “intersection of the public's opportunity to obtain information about their government's activities and the legitimate interests of the executive branch in maintaining secrecy about matters of national security,” Newman wrote. The court case stemmed from lawsuits filed by The New York Times and two of its reporters, Scott Shane and Charlie Savage, and by the American Civil Liberties Union. Newman wrote in the ruling, “has been lost by virtue of public statements of public officials at the highest levels and official disclosure of the D.O.J. “Whatever protection the legal analysis might once have had,” Judge Jon O. In February 2013, the Department of Justice (DOJ) also released a “white paper,” providing a general analysis of why targeted killings are constitutional.
0 kommentar(er)
