By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Trump administration’s use of lethal force against alleged members of “designated terrorist organizations” in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean raises concerns about expanding executive power. The administration’s refusal to clarify if similar actions could occur within the U.S., particularly against groups designated as “domestic terrorist organizations” under NSPM-7, fuels fears of extrajudicial killings. Experts and lawmakers warn that the broad application of this term lacks legal basis and could be used to suppress dissent. Critics highlight the dangers of labeling actions such as drug trafficking as armed conflict to justify lethal actions.
Read the original article here
White House Refuses to Rule Out Summary Executions of People on Its Secret Domestic Terrorist List, and the implications of such a scenario are chilling to consider. The very notion that political opponents, or anyone deemed undesirable by the administration, could be targeted for extrajudicial killings is a direct assault on the fundamental principles of the Constitution. Specifically, the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee due process of law, meaning no one can be deprived of life, liberty, or property without a fair legal process, including a trial. Any attempt to bypass these protections in the name of national security or political expediency is an egregious violation of the social contract.
This is made even more alarming when considering the vague and potentially arbitrary nature of a “secret domestic terrorist list.” If the criteria for inclusion on this list are not transparent, and the targets are not given the opportunity to defend themselves, the potential for abuse is immense. The administration could label anyone it dislikes – protesters, journalists, activists, or even ordinary citizens – as a threat and justify their elimination. This resembles authoritarian regimes, where dissent is swiftly and brutally crushed. The fact that the White House reportedly refuses to rule out such actions raises serious questions about the administration’s respect for the rule of law.
The possibility of such a list is terrifying because it strikes at the core of what it means to live in a democracy. It creates a climate of fear and self-censorship, where individuals may hesitate to express their opinions or participate in peaceful protests for fear of being targeted. Furthermore, the very existence of such a list undermines the trust between the government and its citizens. How can people trust a government that secretly designates them as enemies and considers the extrajudicial elimination of these people an option? This erodes the foundations of a just society.
The lack of transparency is a critical concern. If the administration will not disclose the criteria for inclusion, the list of names, or the process by which individuals are selected for potential summary execution, there is no way to hold the government accountable. This creates an environment where unchecked power can flourish, and where those in authority can act with impunity. The secrecy surrounding the list, as well as the refusal to rule out its use for extrajudicial killings, is deeply disturbing and suggests a dangerous disregard for the rights of the people.
The media’s role in all of this is of utmost importance, especially the need for a vigilant press. The press is obligated to question any administration, especially when such threats to our liberties surface. Any lack of inquiry is a dereliction of their duty. This, of course, raises questions about our current state, with so many questioning the ineptitude and spinelessness of the media.
We must remember the history of authoritarian regimes and the steps they took to consolidate power. Creating lists of enemies, suppressing dissent, and eliminating political opponents are all hallmarks of such regimes. If the United States is to avoid going down this path, it is imperative that we remain vigilant, speak out against injustice, and demand that the government uphold the Constitution and protect the rights of all citizens.
The response to this kind of threat must be robust. It demands action from both the judiciary and the legislature. It demands that the judiciary uphold the Constitution and the legislature to be a check and balance of the executive branch.
We cannot underestimate the potential for such a list to be weaponized for political purposes. If the government is willing to use lethal force against its political opponents, there is no limit to the abuses it might commit. We must demand accountability, transparency, and a renewed commitment to the rule of law. This should be a red line that cannot be crossed. We must be prepared to resist any attempt to undermine the rights and freedoms guaranteed to all Americans.