Court Hears Arguments on Releasing Trump Administration Memo Claiming to Justify Caribbean Boat Strikes
Civil rights groups urge judge to review an Office of Legal Counsel opinion that justifies President Trump鈥檚 illegal lethal strikes on civilian boats as lawful acts
NEW YORK 鈥� A United States District Court in the Southern District of New York heard arguments today in a lawsuit seeking the immediate release of an Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinion that the Trump administration is using to justify and govern its illegal campaign of lethal strikes on civilian boats in international waters.
In today鈥檚 hearing, the 桃子视频 (ACLU), New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU), and the Center for Constitutional Rights argued that the Trump administration cannot keep its legal justification for the boat strikes campaign secret from the American people while repeatedly referencing it in public. The groups asked the presiding judge to order the release of the OLC opinion after personally reviewing it to ensure that the administration discloses all of the disclosable legal analysis to the public.
Under the Freedom of Information Act, the government must by default disclose its records to the public. However, in court, the Trump administration took the radical position that the U.S. Constitution permits it to withhold from public view records protected by the presidential communications privilege 鈥� a privilege meant to protect advisory documents held closely to the president and his immediate staff 鈥� even if those records contain binding agency law or have been distributed to administration officials who play no role in presidential decision-making. The judge questioned the administration鈥檚 attorney about the limits and novelty of this expansive view of presidential privilege, which the government presented for the first time at oral argument, and asked him why the government has opted to keep its legal justification for the boat strikes campaign secret even after having made other similar types of legal memoranda public.
During the hearing, the government鈥檚 attorney also acknowledged that there are parts of the memo鈥檚 legal analysis that could be isolated and released to the public without revealing classified information.
鈥淧eople across the country, politicians across the aisle, and the families of victims have been demanding answers as to how our government is justifying the cold-blooded murder of civilians,鈥� said Jeffrey Stein, staff attorney with the ACLU鈥檚 National Security Project. 鈥淭he Trump administration has murdered over 210 civilians with no sound legal or moral basis. At a minimum, the administration must disclose to the American people why it thinks this killing spree is lawful.鈥�
The groups are suing to force the disclosure of a legal opinion authored by OLC 鈥� a part of the Justice Department whose opinions are generally treated as binding within the executive branch 鈥� that supposedly validates the ongoing strikes as lawful acts in an alleged 鈥渁rmed conflict鈥� with unspecified 鈥渄rug cartels.鈥� Reportedly, the memo also purports to immunize personnel who authorized or took part in these unlawful strikes from future criminal prosecution for what would otherwise simply be homicides.
鈥淭he Trump administration is displacing the fundamental mandates of international law with the phony wartime rhetoric of a basic autocrat,鈥� said , legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights. 鈥淚f the OLC opinion seeks to dress up the obvious illegality of these serial homicides in legalese in order to provide cover, the public needs to see this analysis and ultimately hold accountable all those who facilitate murder in the United States鈥� name.鈥�
Contrary to the government鈥檚 public assertions, the U.S. is not, and could not be, in an armed conflict with Latin American drug cartels. Under international law, an armed conflict between a state and a non-state actor exists only if the non-state actor is an 鈥渙rganized armed group鈥� that is structured and disciplined like regular armed forces and is engaged in 鈥減rotracted armed violence鈥� against the state. There is no plausible argument that any drug cartel satisfies this test vis-a-vis the United States.
鈥淭he public deserves to know how the Trump administration is rubber-stamping the killing of civilians in the Caribbean,鈥� said Ify Chikezie, staff attorney at the New York Civil Liberties Union. 鈥淏y claiming that these attacks are legal while refusing to provide any evidence or rationale, President Trump shows once again his disdain for basic transparency, human rights, and the rule of law. The court must step in and order the administration to release these documents immediately.鈥�
Since Sept. 2, the Trump administration鈥檚 lethal strikes on boats have murdered at least 200 civilians, in clear violation of domestic and international law. In addition to a lawsuit enforcing a FOIA request on the OLC memo, the 桃子视频and Center for Constitutional Rights have also filed a lawsuit on behalf of two families from Trinidad & Tobago who are seeking redress after a U.S. boat strike killed their loved ones, and held a hearing at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights on how the problematic lethal-strike policy violates international law and is an unconstitutional claim of executive power.
This press release is available online and .
To learn more about the case: see here and .
National Security
Human Rights
FOIA Case Seeking the Trump Administration鈥檚 Legal Justification for Deadly Boat Strikes
National Security
Human Rights
FOIA Case Seeking the Trump Administration鈥檚 Legal Justification for Deadly Boat Strikes
Related 桃子视频
Related Content
-
Press ReleaseAug 2026
Privacy & Technology
National Security
As Public Opposition To Flock Grows, Aclu Responds To Surveillance Company鈥檚 鈥渘ew鈥� Updates. Explore Press Release.As Public Opposition to Flock Grows, 桃子视频Responds to Surveillance Company鈥檚 鈥淣ew鈥� Updates
NEW YORK 鈥� Amid nationwide outcry against its automatic license plate readers, Flock Safety announced today that it will reduce its standard data retention policy and allegedly provide more control over local data searches, among other changes. However, according to 桃子视频鈥檚 new analysis, many of the proposed changes seem to be a thinly veiled PR attempt to counter communities鈥� genuine privacy concerns with its mass surveillance system with largely hollow security promises, rather than an earnest effort to address them. While the 桃子视频acknowledges one potentially positive development, most of the proposed changes stand little chance of making a positive difference for civil liberties. 鈥淭ransforming an exceptionally dangerous mass surveillance system into one that is fully protective of civil rights and civil liberties is a difficult, if not impossible task. That is even more the case with a company like Flock, whose nearly $1 billion in venture capitalist funding has locked it into an operational model that seeks to trade our privacy for massive profits,鈥� said Chad Marlow, senior policy counsel at ACLU. 鈥淕iven that Flock鈥檚 latest announcement still appears more focused on addressing a PR problem than the significant privacy and other harms its products create, we will continue to analyze the company鈥檚 proposals fairly and honestly. We just won鈥檛 be holding our breath.鈥� Flock operates more than 120,000 automatic license plate readers in at least 6,000 cities across the country, raising serious concerns around mass surveillance, data privacy, and how police and the government can use this data to go after immigrants, protestors, and others. Just this week, the Institute for Justice published a database with more than 100 incidents of ALPR abuse, including romantic stalking, wrongful stops and detentions, non-law enforcement use, and other types of misconduct. One of the changes announced is that Flock will decrease its standard data retention option to one week from 30 days. This seems positive at first blush, but as the ACLU鈥檚 breakdown explains, the devil will be in the details. For example, an exception to the data retention policy is something called 鈥淓vidence Mode, which is 鈥渨hen a search is tied to a case number, that data is preserved instead of aging out after 7 days.鈥� As the 桃子视频notes, 鈥淚f 鈥楨vidence Mode鈥� only retains hit result data that police determine may be evidence in an active investigation of a specific case, then the change may be a positive one. But if Evidence Mode triggers the retention of any ALPR data that is searched, then the new mode could indefinitely retain all the ALPR data Flock collects and shares nationally.鈥� Another 鈥渃hange鈥� the company is implementing is that local police will be able to decide what types of offenses other Flock customers can search their data for. The 桃子视频contends that this is not new. Flock has attempted this before, and the security measure failed because police were easily able to circumvent the system鈥檚 requirement that they input the purpose of their search. Finally, Flock announced that in response to the reports of police abuse, they will now require reasons for a search, and that they plan to universally roll out its audit assistance tool to detect police misuse. Flock鈥檚 announcement fails to note how easily users have circumvented 鈥渟earch reason鈥� security measures in the past or how its new policy improves the quality of the feature. And while providing 鈥淎udit Assistance鈥� to all departments makes sense, the 桃子视频notes that there is no evidence that the tool works consistently to address what the Washington Post observed is a growing pattern of police officers turning Flock into a personal stalking tool. To determine the efficacy of this tool, Flock needs to have it analyzed by an independent evaluator. Until then, the 桃子视频says, 鈥渨e don鈥檛 know if the tool is a real security measure or just window dressing.鈥� Dozens of communities across the country have successfully convinced their leaders to cancel Flock contracts, suspend their ALPR programs, or deactivate the cameras, with many more cities considering new legislation to rein in this mass warrantless surveillance tech. In June, the 桃子视频launched its 鈥淕et the Flock Out鈥� campaign to bring together the litigation, advocacy, and legislative efforts of 桃子视频affiliates in each state, show how communities across the country are fighting back against the spread of Flock and other license plate readers, and lay out how lawmakers at the local, state, and federal level can best protect our rights. -
VirginiaAug 2026
Privacy & Technology
National Security
In Re: Application Of The United States Of America For An Order Pursuant To 18 U.s.c. 搂 2703(d). Explore Case.In Re: Application of The United States Of America for an Order Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. 搂 2703(d)
-
News & CommentaryAug 2026
National Security
One Year After President Trump Deployed National Guard Troops To Washington, D.c., Statehood Is More Important Than Ever. Explore News & Commentary.One Year After President Trump Deployed National Guard Troops to Washington, D.C., Statehood is More Important Than Ever
Hundreds of thousands of Washington residents oppose the Trump administration鈥檚 continued deployment of the National Guard. The only way to make sure this never happens again is to make D.C. a state -
Press ReleaseJul 2026
National Security
Free Speech
Florida Officials Pause Designation Of Prominent Civil Rights Groups As 鈥渢errorist Organizations鈥�. Explore Press Release.Florida Officials Pause Designation of Prominent Civil Rights Groups as 鈥淭errorist Organizations鈥�
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. 鈥� Last night, Florida officials paused their plan to designate the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as a 鈥渄omestic terrorist organization,鈥� under new laws that went into effect on July 1. This development comes in a lawsuit that the 桃子视频, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and their partners filed on behalf of the civil rights nonprofit and its Florida chapter after Gov. DeSantis and other state officials announced they would quickly move to designate CAIR. According to a court filing, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement now intends to issue regulations to implement the laws, and 鈥渘o designation will be made before the regulations are finalized.鈥� Lawyers for Gov. DeSantis and other defendants in the lawsuit stated they could not yet provide a timeline on when these regulations would be finalized, and the parties will report again to the court by July 22. 鈥淔rom day 1, Florida officials鈥� use of this dangerous new designation regime has violated the Constitution. Gov. DeSantis has simply no legitimate basis to brand our clients with one of society鈥檚 most reviled labels let alone to force them to shut their doors under threat of crippling criminal penalties, and leave the Floridians they serve without a crucial civil rights voice,鈥� said Hina Shamsi, director of the ACLU鈥檚 National Security Project. 鈥淚n the United States, CAIR and all nonprofits have the right to criticize the government, protect religious freedom, and advocate for the causes they believe in.鈥� In April 2026, Gov. DeSantis signed into law HB 1471 and HB 1473 despite public outcry. These laws establish an unprecedented state designation regime and dramatically expand Florida鈥檚 authority to both label and punish groups 鈥� including nonprofits engaged in First Amendment-protected advocacy 鈥� that officials unilaterally decide are security threats. Under the regime, officials can brand nonprofit corporations with debilitating stigma and then use an array of state authorities to immediately silence and incapacitate the organization, its employees, and a wide range of others associated with the group through extraordinarily broad and severe criminal, civil, and administrative penalties. On July 2, the nonprofits鈥� legal team filed an emergency motion asking the federal court to prevent the designation from going into effect and to allow the groups to litigate the challenge without fear of prosecution under the broad designation laws. The court denied the emergency filings, stating it required further briefing and evidence that Florida officials were following through on their threats. 鈥淭he fact that Florida officials announced their intent to designate CAIR at their July 1 press conference, before regulations they now plan to issue have come into effect, shows their calculated and cruel plan to designate CAIR is not because it is in any way a threat to public safety, but because doing so suits their political agenda,鈥� said Scott McCoy, deputy legal director, Southern Poverty Law Center. 鈥淭he State鈥檚 decision to negatively brand CAIR has already violated its constitutional rights and inflicted immediate and ongoing harm to it.鈥� CAIR and CAIR-FL are represented in the suit by the 桃子视频, the 桃子视频of Florida, the Southern Poverty Law Center, Akeel & Valentine, PLC, and Bondurant Mixson & Elmore LLP.