Sen. Rand Paul (R., Ky.) staged a filibuster Wednesday to hold up a vote on confirming a new head of the Central Intelligence Agency, as he sought an administration promise to never use unmanned drones to kill Americans who aren't involved in combat.
What's Sen. Paul's main concern?
Mr. Paul is one of several lawmakers who have questioned the administration's use of drones and have pressed the administration on its policy covering targeted killings of American citizens who are terror suspects. Last month, Mr. Paul threatened to filibuster the nomination of John Brennan to be the next Central Intelligence Agency chief until he addresses whether he believes the president is authorized to use lethal force, such as a drone strike, against an American citizen in the U.S.
What is the tie to the Brennan confirmation hearing?
The scope and scale of the U.S.'s drone policy and the administration's secrecy about the matter has emerged as a key issue in the confirmation of Mr. Brennan, who is currently the White House's counterterrorism chief and is considered the lead architect of the administration's drone campaign. In written answers to Senate intelligence committee questions about whether the president could order drone strikes in the U.S., he answered "This Administration has not carried out drone strikes inside the United States and has no intention of doing so."
What happened next?
Sen. Paul wrote letters three letters to Mr. Brennan (here are letters one, two and three as posted on Mr. Paul's website) that included dozens of questions concerning the powers of the executive branch to order the killing of American citizens, as well as related questions about the number of drone strikes and the number of people killed by drones.
He received a response from Mr. Brennan, who said he would defer to Attorney General Eric Holder on questions about the president's powers. He also said that the CIA, which he was nominated to lead, does not have the authority to conduct lethal operations within the U.S.
Mr. Holder, in his letter to Mr. Paul, wrote, that the government "has not carried out drone strikes in the U.S. and has no intention of doing so." He added: "It is possible…to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the president to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States," citing crisis scenarios like 9/11 or Pearl Harbor.
Did these responses satisfy Mr. Paul?
No. Mr. Paul is looking for a clear statement from the administration that the U.S. will not use drones in the U.S. against noncombatants. In a press release Tuesday, he said that Mr. Holder's "refusal to rule out the possibility of drone strikes on American citizens and on American soil is more than frightening – it is an affront the Constitutional due process rights of all Americans.
If the administration says it's not going to carry out drone strikes on Americans in the U.S., what's the issue?
The administration says there could be extraordinary circumstances, like 9/11, when the president needs to have that authority. But because the administration isn't ruling it out entirely, Mr. Paul and others are concerned that the administration isn't explicitly ruling out killing of Americans in more common circumstances that fall short of a crisis.
And that's what brought on the filibuster Wednesday?
Right. When Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) moved to push the Senate to a final vote on the nomination Wednesday, Sen. Paul began his filibuster. He started shortly before noon, and promised to speak "for as long as I can hold up." Other senators joined the effort, including Sens. Mike Lee of Utah and Ted Cruz of Texas, both Republicans, and Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, all of whom have concerns about the drone policy. The move is rare: Senate aides say the last time anyone used a so-called talking filibuster was Dec. 10, 2010, when Sen Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent, protested a budget deal for 8 1/2 hours.
