This whole mess hinges on one's interpretation of substantive or procedural due process. I say interpretation because due process is something that courts constantly hear cases on.
I agree with Ron Paul on the importance of due process and on many other points about American intervention overseas.
The first question that I have to answer for myself is this: Was Anwar al-Awlaki owed due process?
To make that determination I need to look at the facts that are widely known to be true: Anwar al-Awlaki was a known and targeted terrorist who was openly leading a terrorist organization that has as its intent to kill Americans. He is a citizen of the US. He is a citizen of the US who left the US to wage war and to help wage war and to train others to wage war and to promote the wagging of war----against the US. He had been hunted. He was found and blown to bits.
My conclusion: Anwar al-Awlaki was a US citizen who at one time was owed due process of law, both substantive and procedural due process per the 5th and 14th Amendments to the US constitution. al-Awalki himself declined the right to due processs when he helped organized or actually did organized, trained, and funded terrorist attacks against the USA. The US gov't made it known that he was wanted for his crimes and he had every opportunity to us his network of sources to arrange to turn himself in to US authorities to come back to the US to receive due process and his trial. He did not do anything of the sort.
Due process is designed to restrain and limit government power so that it cannot treat its citizens unfairly. I think allof us can see how important this truly is to the American way of life where freedom and liberty is cherished. But with great freedom to a citizenry comes great responsibility of that citizenry as well. al-Alwaki passed on his responsibility by waging war on this country. In my mind, this is where his right to due process ended. If I ever engaged in the terrorist crimes that he did, I would expect my due process rights to be seen as ended as well.
My interpretation and views of due process may never stand up to the SCOTUS standards and I don't care. Their decision making on other issues does not give me great peace of mind anyway. Ron Paul is a great choice for President, but on this singular issue I will say he is wrong.
Last edited by straycat; 10/02/11 09:56 PM.
