U.S. Lethal Strikes on Suspected Drug Traffickers

Detailing how, under different scenarios, international law and U.S. past practices apply to Sept. 2 boat strike on survivors.

A deep dive on the international law applicable to the U.S. military's lethal operations against suspected drug boats

A list of questions that should be answered by U.S. government officials regarding the lethal campaign against suspected drug trafficking individuals, groups, and vessels.

Co-hosted with RCLS, a panel of experts discuss the Trump administration's continued campaign of lethal strikes against suspected drug traffickers.

If the United States chooses a path where killing defenseless survivors becomes acceptable, American servicemembers will pay the price for that choice.

Legal and ethical debates surge around unreleased OLC memo on lethal boat strikes in the Caribbean, with growing calls for transparency and scrutiny of military lawyers.

An expert backgrounder on the reported Hegseth "no quarter" order to kill everyone aboard a suspected drug boat in the Caribbean on Sept. 2.

The Trump administration's lethal strikes are the apotheosis of the last quarter century's often always secret and often unreviewable executive branch legal reasoning.

A mock “operational legal review” depicting what a staff judge advocate’s advice should have been prior to the first reported strike on an alleged drug trafficking vessel.

The only way States can avoid complicity in “arbitrary killings” under international human rights law is to refrain from sharing intelligence that, in part, enables them.

Clearly, U.S. actions are threatening to Venezuela. But do they amount to an unlawful threat under international law, or are they merely a lawful show of force?

The administration's legal argument is both "incorrect and dangerous," writes Finucane.