Get Ready for Rand Paul’s Next Drone Filibuster

He may talk a bunch, but he actually can’t block Obama’s judicial pick the way he could last year.

National Journal
Elahe Izad
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Elahe Izad
May 16, 2014, 10:02 a.m.

Rand Paul drew praise from both the Right and Left last year when he moun­ted a 13-hour, talk­ing fili­buster from the Sen­ate floor to block a nom­in­a­tion over ob­jec­tions re­lated to drone killings of Amer­ic­an cit­izens. And he might do it again this year.

The Re­pub­lic­an sen­at­or from Ken­tucky plans to block the nom­in­a­tion of Dav­id Bar­ron to the U.S. Court of Ap­peals for the First Cir­cuit. Bar­ron, a former Justice De­part­ment of­fi­cial, was a main au­thor of a secret Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion “drone memo,” which re­portedly offered a leg­al jus­ti­fic­a­tion for the killing of Amer­ic­an ex­trem­ist An­war al-Aw­laki, who was liv­ing in Ye­men at the time. After mount­ing pres­sure from both lib­er­als and liber­tari­ans, the ad­min­is­tra­tion al­lowed sen­at­ors to read the memos, of which there are two doc­u­ments.

“I’ve read Dav­id Bar­ron’s memos con­cern­ing the leg­al jus­ti­fic­a­tion for killing an Amer­ic­an cit­izen over­seas without a tri­al or leg­al rep­res­ent­a­tion, and I am not sat­is­fied,” Paul said in a state­ment Thursday. There is “no val­id leg­al pre­ced­ent to jus­ti­fy the killing of an Amer­ic­an cit­izen not en­gaged in com­bat,” the sen­at­or ad­ded, say­ing he plans to fili­buster Bar­ron’s nom­in­a­tion.

Sen­at­ors look to block ac­tion on the Sen­ate floor all the time, but not through a talk­ing fili­buster. Asked wheth­er Paul’s plan to block Bar­ron’s nom­in­a­tion means an­oth­er mara­thon fili­buster, Paul’s press sec­ret­ary said he “will do everything in his power to op­pose the nom­in­a­tion of Dav­id Bar­ron, and thus a fili­buster is not out of the ques­tion.”

Thanks to C-SPAN and so­cial me­dia, talk­ing non­stop to thwart a bill — which was how law­makers fili­bustered bills in the old days — has the po­ten­tial to draw massive amounts of at­ten­tion. Take Demo­crat­ic le­gis­lat­or Wendy Dav­is’s fili­buster of an abor­tion bill in the Texas state House. Her ef­fort went vir­al and pro­pelled her to the na­tion­al stage.

Paul’s fili­buster last year spurred sur­pris­ing sup­port from both con­ser­vat­ives and lib­er­als. Back then, the sen­at­or was block­ing the con­firm­a­tion of John Bren­nan to lead the CIA, after the ad­min­is­tra­tion had re­fused to rule out the use of drone strikes on Amer­ic­an soil.

“I will speak un­til I can no longer speak,” Paul said on the Sen­ate floor last March. “I will speak as long as it takes, un­til the alarm is soun­ded from coast to coast that our Con­sti­tu­tion is im­port­ant, that your rights to tri­al by jury are pre­cious, that no Amer­ic­an should be killed by a drone on Amer­ic­an soil without first be­ing charged with a crime, without first be­ing found to be guilty by a court.”

The tim­ing of the fili­buster, which spawned the hasht­ag #Stand­With­Rand, came shortly be­fore the con­ser­vat­ive con­fab at CPAC. There, it be­came clear that Paul’s polit­ic­al stock had ris­en con­sid­er­ably thanks to his speech.

But there’s a cru­cial dif­fer­ence between last year and the cur­rent case. Where­as Paul’s fili­buster did ef­fect­ively block Bren­nan’s nom­in­a­tion from mov­ing for­ward, this po­ten­tial speech will take place in a post-nuc­le­ar Sen­ate. The up­per cham­ber has since changed how it con­firms ju­di­cial nom­in­ees — last March, 60 votes were needed to con­firm a nom­in­ee; now, just 51 are re­quired. That means that Paul can talk all he wants, but it won’t mat­ter much if 51 Demo­crats back Pres­id­ent Obama’s nom­in­ee.

Lib­er­als have also voiced con­cerns over Bar­ron’s nom­in­a­tion. Demo­crat­ic Sen. Mark Ud­all of Col­or­ado, for in­stance, has said he won’t back Bar­ron’s nom­in­a­tion un­til the memos are made pub­lic.

On Thursday, White House coun­sel met with the Demo­crat­ic caucus to dis­cuss the memos and Bar­ron’s nom­in­a­tion. A Sen­ate vote on Bar­ron’s nom­in­a­tion will come next week.

“It’s a dif­fi­cult is­sue. He’s a bril­liant judge, who on most is­sues, is in sync with the vast ma­jor­ity of Demo­crats. And the ques­tion is this memo,” Chuck Schu­mer, the Sen­ate’s No. 3 Demo­crat, said be­fore the meet­ing. “The people who have read the memos — I have not at this point — say when you read them, it’s far more ex­culp­at­ory of Bar­ron than the news re­ports might in­dic­ate.”

What We're Following See More »
WITH LIVE BLOGGING
Trump Deposition Video Is Online
21 hours ago
STAFF PICKS

The video of Donald Trump's deposition in his case against restaurateur Jeffrey Zakarian is now live. Slate's Jim Newell and Josh Voorhees are live-blogging it while they watch.

Source:
SOUND LEVEL AFFECTED
Debate Commission Admits Issues with Trump’s Mic
22 hours ago
THE LATEST

The Commission on Presidential Debates put out a statement today that gives credence to Donald Trump's claims that he had a bad microphone on Monday night. "Regarding the first debate, there were issues regarding Donald Trump's audio that affected the sound level in the debate hall," read the statement in its entirety.

Source:
TRUMP VS. CHEFS
Trump Deposition Video to Be Released
23 hours ago
THE LATEST

"A video of Donald Trump testifying under oath about his provocative rhetoric about Mexicans and other Latinos is set to go public" as soon as today. "Trump gave the testimony in June at a law office in Washington in connection with one of two lawsuits he filed last year after prominent chefs reacted to the controversy over his remarks by pulling out of plans to open restaurants at his new D.C. hotel. D.C. Superior Court Judge Brian Holeman said in an order issued Thursday evening that fears the testimony might show up in campaign commercials were no basis to keep the public from seeing the video."

Source:
A CANDIDATE TO BE ‘PROUD’ OF
Chicago Tribune Endorses Gary Johnson
1 days ago
THE LATEST

No matter that his recall of foreign leaders leaves something to be desired, Gary Johnson is the choice of the Chicago Tribune's editorial board. The editors argue that Donald Trump couldn't do the job of president, while hitting Hillary Clinton for "her intent to greatly increase federal spending and taxation, and serious questions about honesty and trust." Which leaves them with Johnson. "Every American who casts a vote for him is standing for principles," they write, "and can be proud of that vote. Yes, proud of a candidate in 2016."

NEVER TRUMP
USA Today Weighs in on Presidential Race for First Time Ever
1 days ago
THE DETAILS

"By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump." That's the message from USA Today editors, who are making the first recommendation on a presidential race in the paper's 34-year history. It's not exactly an endorsement; they make clear that the editorial board "does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement." But they state flatly that Donald Trump is, by "unanimous consensus of the editorial board, unfit for the presidency."

Source:
×