Is Trump’s word the law in US? This is how secret memo eyes to ‘legalise’ Venezuela boat strikes

In its justification of killing 80 people in 20 strikes on boats in international waters, the US Department of Justice has relied on President Donald Trump’s words instead of writing any legal theory defending the policy, according to a report.

The Justice Department has said the United and its allies are in a state of armed conflict with drug as Trump has claimed and that allows him to use his wartime powers to order strikes on these boats, according to The New York Times.

But the memo does not mention whether any of the allies mentioned in the reasoning have asked the Trump administration to act on their behalf or address the fact that only Congress can declare wars.

The administration has not identified any of the persons killed or provided evidence that they were involved in terrorism. It has simply said these boats were carrying drugs and people onboard were ’narco-terrorists’ and it was okay to kill them.

Starting September 2, at the orders of Trump, the US military has carried out 20 strikes in the international waters of Caribbean Sea or eastern Pacific Ocean and killed 80 persons. Critics have said these killing unlawful as even criminals outside of wars are treated as civilians and need to be tried in courts. Longstanding US policy states that such persons are captured and tried in courts instead of being summarily executed.

Justice Dept turns Trump’s words into legal theory

The Justice Department has essentially termed Trump’s words into legal theory — even if it violates law and longstanding policies.

The Justice Department’s memo justifying US strikes rests on the idea that the United States and its allies are legally in a state of armed conflict with drug cartels and this idea is based on Trump’s words alone instead of any independent evidence or legal reasoning, according to The Times.

The memo, which has been prepared by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, signed off on the military campaign by saying that extrajudicial killings of suspected drug traffickers in international waters were lawful under Trump’s wartime powers.

The memo repeats Trump’s claims that drug cartels have been intentionally trying to kill Americans and destabilise the Western Hemisphere. The memo has not characterised these groups illicit businesses trying to profit from drugs but as terrorists who sell narcotics as a means of financing violence.

In doing so, the memo has subverted the meaning of terrorism and war. As per the law, only Congress can declare war. And, as per longstanding convention, ideologically- or religiously-motivated groups are classified as terrorist groups, such as the Islamic State or al-Qaeda.

To justify US strikes, the memo has said that drugs purportedly carried by these boats would generate revenue that these groups would use to buy military equipment to wage the purported armed conflict against the United States and allies.

With such an explanation, the Justice Department has uncritically accepted Trump’s rhetoric and discarded facts. It has accepted Trump’s claims that these strikes have saved hundreds of thousands of lives by destroying purported drugs bound to the United States.

But both Trump and the Justice Department ignored the fact that most of drug-related deaths in the United Stats are from fentanyl that comes via Mexico and not cocaine that comes from South America, the region where ongoing US strikes are concentrated.

Trump offers immunity to military

In another section, the Justice Department has declared immunity to entire chain of command involved in ordering, organising, and carrying out these strikes.

Citing a need to protect society from cartels, the Justice Department compared military personnel participating in these strikes to police personnel who break the speed limits in pursuit of a suspect, according to the Times.

Just like such police personnel are not considered to have committed a crime even as they technically crossed the speed limit, the Justice Department has said that US personnel involved in strikes on boat would also not be considered to have committed a crime.