> What part of the Constitution are we ignoring?
There are a number of amendments that could be pretty reasonable argued to give citizens the right not to get killed by drone strikes.
There are a number of amendments that could be pretty reasonable argued to give citizens the right not to get killed by drone strikes.
Drone striking (or otherwise killing) citizens without due process seems unconstitutional. Drone striking foreign targets does not have those constitutional protections.
It's also worth noting that what someone thinks is legal is not necessarily what someone thinks _should_ be legal; I imagine that almost everyone here has at least some laws that they disagree with, but that's separate from the question of whether the law exists or not.