It's not like SCOTUS goes around saying what's constitutional and what's not at a whim. Odds are this is a novel issue (my cursory look hasn't turned up any thing in the SupCt Reporter addressing US government use of "assassination"). SCOTUS gets to say whether an act or enactment of government is constitutional, it can't prognosticate based on hypothetical scenarios. If it's never been presented to them, it's open for debate (this is why people pay lawyers instead of just finding a book full of answers). Think of it as Schroedinger's Law.
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 8/4/10 11:37 (UTC)