ÀÏ°ÄÃÅ¿ª½±½á¹û

A federal appellate court's finally allows the American public to evaluate the legal theories that were the basis for one of the Obama administration's most controversial acts – the extrajudicial killing of an American citizen.

Authored three years ago by the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), the 41-page memo contends that the president has broad power to carry out the targeted killing of terrorism suspects, even in geographic areas far removed from conventional battlefields.

The publication of the memo is a victory for transparency – the result of by the ÀÏ°ÄÃÅ¿ª½±½á¹û and the New York Times. (I argued the ÀÏ°ÄÃÅ¿ª½±½á¹û's case before the appellate court.) It is a very rare thing for a federal court in the United States to order the release of information that the government contends is properly classified. In transparency litigation in the national-security sphere, the courts almost invariably defer. That the court declined to defer here suggests that it found the arguments from the Obama administration to be not simply unpersuasive but wholly without foundation.

But despite the release of the drone memo, the American public still does not have the information it needs in order to evaluate the lawfulness and wisdom of its government's policies. Indeed, to read through the memo is to be reminded of how successful the Obama administration has been at rationing even the most basic information.

Read the rest at .

Learn more about the government's targeted kiling program and other civil liberty issues: Sign up for breaking news alerts, , and .