Hi there,

Can you donate $10 per month to support Democracy Now!’s independent journalism all year long? Since our very first broadcast in 1996, we’ve refused to take government or corporate funding, because nothing is more important to us than our editorial independence—especially in this unprecedented election year. When Democracy Now! covers war and peace or the climate crisis, we’re not brought to you by the weapons manufacturers or the oil, gas, coal or nuclear companies. Our journalism is powered by YOU. But that means we can’t do our work without your support. Right now, a generous donor will DOUBLE your gift, which means your $10 donation this month will be worth $20 to Democracy Now! Please do your part right now. We’re all in this together. Thank you so much.
-Amy Goodman

Non-commercial news needs your support.

We rely on contributions from you, our viewers and listeners to do our work. If you visit us daily or weekly or even just once a month, now is a great time to make your monthly contribution.

Please do your part today.

Donate

Judge Upholds Drone Secrecy Despite Doubts on Attacks’ Legality

HeadlineJan 07, 2013

The ongoing drone attacks come days after a federal judge ruled the Obama administration is under no obligation to publicly disclose their legal justification. The American Civil Liberties Union and The New York Times had filed a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act demanding the U.S. government disclose the legal basis for launching drone strikes overseas. The suit was filed after the U.S. killed the American-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen despite having never charged him with a crime. In upholding the Obama administration’s right to secrecy, U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon expressed misgivings about the drone program itself, writing: “I can find no way around the thicket of laws and precedents that effectively allow the Executive Branch … to proclaim as perfectly lawful certain actions that seem on their face incompatible with our Constitution and laws, while keeping the reasons for their conclusion a secret.” McMahon continued, “I can only conclude that the government has not violated [the Freedom of Information Act] by refusing to turn over the documents, and so cannot be compelled by this court of law to explain in detail the reasons why its actions do not violate the Constitution and laws of the United States. The Alice-in-Wonderland nature of this pronouncement is not lost on me.”

The original content of this program is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. Please attribute legal copies of this work to democracynow.org. Some of the work(s) that this program incorporates, however, may be separately licensed. For further information or additional permissions, contact us.

Non-commercial news needs your support

We rely on contributions from our viewers and listeners to do our work.
Please do your part today.
Make a donation
Top