Follow us on Facebook for Legal Discussions, Advice and Tips
"Hina Shamsi, director of the National Security Project at the American Civil Liberties Union, says the Trump administration's justifications for killing Soleimani are, so far, unconvincing.
"The very limited circumstances in which use of force might be permitted under either domestic or international law quite simply haven't been met here," Shamsi told CNN....
"US officials have rejected the characterization of his killing as an assassination. That's hardly a surprise because assassinations have been illegal under US federal law since 1981. But people have still been assassinated, and the government has not always been considered in violation of the law. This is, in part, because US law does not define "assassinations" with precision, and there are other laws that administrations have used to justify their actions....
"But targeted killings are permitted under international law in only very narrow circumstances, and some legal experts are skeptical that the White House's justification for the strike -- offered without evidence at the time of writing -- meets those standards....
"Agnes Callamard, UN Special Rapporteur on Extra-Judicial Executions, says targeted killings are permitted under international law but only under very strict conditions. The self-defense argument is only valid if there is evidence of an imminent armed attack, she told CNN, and it has to be proportionate to the threat.
"Callamard, who carried out the UN's investigation into the killing of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, said the international law on self-defense was also evolving, calling it both "controversial" and "difficult." For every case in which the law is cited, "we must demand transparency and accountability," Callamard said.
Callamard told CNN that were an armed conflict between the US and Iran already underway, the laws of war would apply -- and Soleimani might therefore be a legitimate target. There would not need to be a formal declaration of war. But to most experts the evidence for an existing armed conflict between the two states is scant. On the contrary, they have been fighting a common enemy in the form of ISIS in places like Iraq....
"Karen Greenberg, director of the Center on National Security at Fordham University Law School, said the Obama administration used the 'imminence' argument in unprecedented and expansive ways in targeting al-Awlaki, and traces of that approach are evident now in the Trump administration's justifications of killing Soleimani.
But she says the Soleimani case is very different. "You can't take aim at an official inside a government and say that is not a war," she told CNN. The administration has "crossed a threshold, and the significance of that cannot be overstated....."
""What happened with the War on Terror is that we had mission creep beyond what the initial authorization was, but it does not extend to here," Greenberg said. Greenberg believes the system is broken. "There has to be some kind of authorization for this war, and it can't be our continually-expanding-without-oversight drone policy that has guided us for the last ten years."
Was the US killing of Qasem Soleimani legal?
cnn.com
In the hours and days after Qasem Soleimani was killed in a US drone strike, his demise was described in various terms: President Donald Trump said he had been "terminated"; other US officials talked about a "targeted killing" and "lethal action."www.cair.com/downloadknowyourrightsguides
Download 'Know Your Rights' Guides
cair.com
CAIR's vision is to be a leading advocate for justice and mutual understanding.CAIR’s mission is to enhance understanding of Islam, protect civil rights, promote justice, and empower American Muslims."By declining to take the case on Monday, the high court let stand a 2018 ruling from the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which found that it is unconstitutional to prosecute people for sleeping on public property if enough shelter or housing isn’t available as an alternative...."
Supreme Court leaves cities with one option on homelessness: More housing
latimes.com
The U.S. Supreme Court's decision not to hear a major homelessness case could end of local anti-camping laws and spur more construction of shelters.Be careful out there.
There's a lot more crime in cyberspace than there is on the streets
“I feel cheated”: Thousands of fake online stores are rushing to cash in — The Washington Post
apple.news
The image on the website showed a full-length coat of buttery sheepskin and plush gray fur. Amber Bass thought the coat, which was described as being made of fake sheepskin and fur, was perfect for an upcoming trip to Chicago and, on sale at $69.99, it seemed like a steal. But the coat she pulled fr...I've wondered. I keep getting a lot of clothing and housewares and jewelry pushed on my feed that just seems too good to be true. Stuff that just can't be manufactured and sold for those prices, even if Wal-Mart did it.
