Yesterday, the White House quashed a lawsuit brought by the ACLU and the Center for Constitutional Rights by invoking the state secrets privelege. The suit attempted to block the government’s program of targeted assassinations of terror suspects by challenging its constitutionality. In particular, the suit sought to remove an American citizen from the CIA’s targeted kill list and to compel the government to explain any guidelines that exist for putting citizens on this list.

Here, in part, is the government’s reply:

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, in the declaration filed in federal court, said he was invoking the military and state secrets privilege because of information that could be disclosed on possible military operations in Yemen.

“I am invoking the privilege over any information, if it exists, that would tend to confirm or deny any allegations in the complaint pertaining to the CIA,” CIA Director Leon Panetta’s court statement said.

By invoking the state secrets privilege, the government is attempting to shut down all lines of questioning pertaining to targeted killings in general and to the American citizen in question, Anwar al-Awlaki, specifically.

It’s important to note that al-Awlaki’s resume as an alleged terrorist is long:

[A]n alleged al-Qaeda regional commander born in New Mexico and reportedly hiding in Yemen, [he] has been linked to the Fort Hood shootings and the attempt by a Nigerian man to blow up an airliner over Detroit on Christmas Day. The cleric, author of “44 Ways to Support Jihad,” also reportedly inspired the Times Square car bombing attempt in May, and placed a fatwa on Seattle Weekly cartoonist Molly Norris for suggesting a controversial “Everybody Draw Muhammad Day”.

He might very well be the “direct and serious threat to national security” that the White House claims he is. But, as the groups bringing the lawsuit have noted, rightly: “The idea that courts should have no role whatsoever in determining the criteria by which the executive branch can kill its own citizens is unacceptable in a democracy.”

Whatever his crimes, he is an American citizen … at least for the moment.

In April, Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.) introduced a resolution urging that al-Awlaki be stripped of his citizenship. It has 17 co-sponors and remains in a House subcommittee.

The idea that the government might strip American citizenship from al-Awlaki, especially so that he can be targeted for extrajudicial execution without running afoul of the Constitution, is deeply problematic. Of course, even without stripping him of his citizenship, the government seems determined to avoid any Constitutional entanglements by blocking anyone from bringing the Constitution to bear on this question through the courts.

What I want to know is this: At what volume should Americans be screaming about the seeming invalidation of the Bill of Rights in this case?

Articles here, here, and here.