Yes, Joe , Anwar Al-Awlaki has committed treason, and treason is a crime punishable by death. As you note, the constitution is explicit in this regard. But in the chunk of Article 3, Section 3 that you cite, something else is also quite explicit:
No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
Now I realize that anyone watching CNN could be considered “witnesses to the same overt act” of Al-Awlaki’s treason. (Whether you could find two people actually watching CNN—now that is a completely separate question.) But the point is that no one has given testimony—that is to say, there has been no trial . And, while Al-Awlaki has certainly confessed to treason, he hasn’t done so in an open court . So, Joe, while I agree with you that the “preponderance of the evidence is clear that Al-Awlaki has committed treason,” I’m still uncomfortable with the idea of “convicting” Al-Awlaki without even the attempt to satisfy due process. As Americans, that’s something that all of us, including Al-Awlaki, are guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment.
