Experts skeptical of legality of rump's strike on alleged drug boat
Katie Bo Lillis, Natasha Bertrand, Zachary Cohen
Under ... pressure ... to provide a legal rationale for the ... killing of 11 alleged drug smugglers by the US military, the Trump administration has ... ducked lawmakers and provided a mishmash of public justifications that raise serious questions about the legality of the strike ...
The Defense Department on Friday abruptly canceled classified briefings ... to several key House and Senate committees ... Lawmakers and staffers had hoped to ask officials questions about the legal justification for the strike, and even get basic details like which military unit conducted the attack, what type of munition was used and the kind of intelligence gathering that went into determining the identities and intentions of those on the boat ...
“The strike was the obvious result of designating them a terrorist organization,” said one person familiar with the Pentagon’s thinking ...
... Congress in 2001 explicitly determined the US to be at war with al Qaeda, officially stamping them as combatants who the US is legally allowed to kill under both domestic and international law. It has not done so for Tren de Aragua. The designation of the group as a foreign terrorist organization — or FTO — under US statute gives the president the authority to engage financial and legal penalties, like sanctions, but it does not automatically authorize the use of lethal force ...
https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/06/politics/venezuela-boat-strike-trump-legality
= new reply since forum marked as read
Kick in to the DU tip jar?
This week we're running a special pop-up mini fund drive. From Monday through Friday we're going ad-free for all registered members, and we're asking you to kick in to the DU tip jar to support the site and keep us financially healthy.
As a bonus, making a contribution will allow you to leave kudos for another DU member, and at the end of the week we'll recognize the DUers who you think make this community great.