The attack "crossed a fundamental line the Department of Defense has been resolutely committed to upholding for many decades—namely, that (except in rare and extreme circumstances not present here) the military must not use lethal force against civilians, even if they are alleged, or even known, to be violating the law," Georgetown law professor Marty Lederman notes in a Just Security essay. "It's difficult to imagine how any lawyers inside the Pentagon could have arrived at a conclusion that this was legal," he told the Times last week, "rather than the very definition of murder under international law rules that the Defense Department has long accepted." Scott R. Anderson, a senior fellow in the National Security Law Program at Columbia Law School, notes that "many of the legal arguments that the Trump administration has advanced in relation to narcotics trafficking might also extend to other, far more troubling uses of force that certain administration officials have reportedly raised—for example, the use of lethal force against unlawful migrants whose transport is facilitated by Tren de Aragua."
Author: Jacob Sullum
Published at: 2025-09-10 21:37:43
Still want to read the full version? Full article
