Due Process v. Judicial Process

“Some have argued that the president is required to get permission from a federal court before taking action against a United States citizen who is a senior operational leader of Al Qaeda or associated forces. This is simply not true. ‘Due process’ and ‘judicial process’ are not one in the same, particularly when it comes to national security. The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process.” Attorney General Eric Holder said in a speech at Northwestern University law school.

This debate all started when the U.S. government authorized the killing of American citizen Anwar al-Awlaki by drone strike in Yemen back in 2011.  The target of the drone strike was a member of Al Qaeda, and because he was understood to be someone who posed “an imminent threat of violence to the United States.”

The memo known as “white paper” which outlines the killing of al-Awlaki explains the “lawfulness of killing, without a trial, an American citizen who executive branch officials decide is an operational leader of Al Qaeda or one of its allies.”

The Fifth Amendment states that you may not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of the law. The Fourteenth Amendment has the Due Process Clause which says the same thing as the Fifth Amendment, but it is applied to the states. The Constitution guarantees every American citizen due process of the law, but Eric Holder and the Obama administration say that due process does not equate to a jury trial. As Stephen Colbert put it, “Due process is just a process that you do.”

This brings up further arguments. In the instance of the Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, there has been talk in the media of the police not needing to give him his Miranda rights. and provide him with a lawyer. Some argue that he is a terror suspect, and he therefore does not get the right to an attorney and the right to remain silent since he need him to talk to give law enforcement further information about

Should there be a difference between due process and judicial process? Does any situation really justify taking away the right of due process from American citizens?




This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Due Process v. Judicial Process

  1. newbieblogster13 says:

    I understand your stance and I agree with it and I believe there are many problems that must be taken note of before there can be judicial process for people of these sorts. As you noted the memo of the “white paper,” it follows old standards that traitors, otherwise citizens, to the country may be allowed to be executed for their crimes against the safety of their own country and the safety of the people within it. Also, there is a question that whether the individual who committed the heinous crime is still considered a U.S. citizen or not. There has been talks that when a person has been discovered to be helping a foreign country or part of a foreign country’s military, their citizenship may be nullified. Obviously, this doesn’t give the government the right to go executing people just because they aren’t citizens, but circumstances do change when they are not a citizen and is seen as a threat to national security. It closely relates to the power of the government going up during times of declared war. Rights of citizens are extremely impeded. Though we are not in declared war as of right now, somethings are still being treated as such and seriously needs revision.

Leave a Reply