[Chode]

Anwar al-Awlaki came to study in the US, he came on a foreign student visa. You see, even though al-Awlaki was born in Las Cruces, New Mexico, his parents were not American citizens. In fact, after his father completed his studies here, the family returned to Yemen. Anwar would not even be considered a 14th Amendment citizen, which states "All person born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." Anwar's parents were never US citizens, nor did they intend to become citizens; neither did his parents have "a permanent domicile and residence in the United States,"  which is the standard according to the Supreme court decision in United States vs Wong Kim Ark.

According to the State Department, there are different rules, and, since al-Awlaki came to the US on a scholarship from Yemen, we can assume that he renounced his US citizenship, because Yemen does not recognize dual citizenship. Furthermore, his father was the Agriculture Minister in Yemen. Otherwise, why would al-Awlaki have come on a foreign student visa to study in Colorado in 1991?

[Cowboy Bob]

a legal debate over whether a U.S. president can order the killing of American citizens.

Wasn't David Koresh as US Citizen?

[late bloomer]

One would think the milkshake community organizer’s own lack of legitmate citizenship would negate any authority to order the justifiable elimination of one of identical lack of citizenship.
God save the Queen.

[bert]

It was the killing Of an enemy warrior

The man was a traitor beyond the pervue of the law

[blueunicorn6]

Damnit! Democrats don’t assassinate people. That missile just contained hugs and warm wishes.

[weezel]

The gang squads and police depts nationwide should take a page from this administration on how to handle their undesirables. DONT indict them, DONT arrest them,AND FOR GODS SAKE, DONT WATERBOARD THEM, KILL them.IF you think they are doing wrong, TAKE THEM OUT!!

[The Great RJ]

Imagine this had happened when Bush was President. Congressional Democrats would be filing articles of impeachment.

[SkyDancer]

Apparently the ACLU believes that the U.S. Constitution SHOULD be a recipe for national suicide. Al-Awlaki was an enemy combatant who waged war, not felony offenses, but war, against his own country. He got all the “due justice” he was entitled to and then some. The ACLU is, once again, on the wrong side of justice and history.

Anyone who believes you can defeat armies of warriors who have no fear of death, no respect for human rights, no sense of humanity, and are totally dedicated to the principal of committing genocide against their enemies simply by fighting them as you would fight bank robbers or drug dealers is completely brain dead.

Government killing citizens without trial? How about David Koresh and 90 other men, women, and children?

[dfwgator]

Who cares? I’m glad he’s dead. End of story.

[ConservativeInPA]

Just sayin' ....

TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER III > Part III > § 1481

§ 1481. Loss of nationality by native-born or naturalized citizen; voluntary action; burden of proof; presumptions

(a) A person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality—

(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application or upon an application filed by a duly authorized agent, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or

(2) taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or

(3) entering, or serving in, the armed forces of a foreign state if

(A) such armed forces are engaged in hostilities against the United States, or

(B) such persons serve as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer; or

(4)

(A) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years if he has or acquires the nationality of such foreign state; or

(B) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years for which office, post, or employment an oath, affirmation, or declaration of allegiance is required; or

(5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state, in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State; or

(6) making in the United States a formal written renunciation of nationality in such form as may be prescribed by, and before such officer as may be designated by, the Attorney General, whenever the United States shall be in a state of war and the Attorney General shall approve such renunciation as not contrary to the interests of national defense; or

(7) committing any act of treason against, or attempting by force to overthrow, or bearing arms against, the United States, violating or conspiring to violate any of the provisions of section 2383 of title 18, or willfully performing any act in violation of section 2385 of title 18, or violating section 2384 of title 18 by engaging in a conspiracy to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, if and when he is convicted thereof by a court martial or by a court of competent jurisdiction.

(b) Whenever the loss of United States nationality is put in issue in any action or proceeding commenced on or after September 26, 1961 under, or by virtue of, the provisions of this chapter or any other Act, the burden shall be upon the person or party claiming that such loss occurred, to establish such claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Any person who commits or performs, or who has committed or performed, any act of expatriation under the provisions of this chapter or any other Act shall be presumed to have done so voluntarily, but such presumption may be rebutted upon a showing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the act or acts committed or performed were not done voluntarily.

[RobinOfKingston]

I think the filth needed killin’, as the saying goes, sometimes you just do the right thing. But just how far can a “Justice memo” be stretched in cases like this? Or, in totally different cases?

Inquiring minds really do want to know.