President Obama signed this directive on May 23, 2013, which he said in a speech at the National Defense University is a framework that governs the use of force by United States against terrorists.

President Barack Obama outlined on May 23, 2013, at the National Defense University, his administration's counterterrorism strategy, which include three areas: "targeted action against terrorists; effective partnerships; and diplomatic engagement and assistance." He discussed legal and moral concerns, and congressional oversight regarding the use of lethal targeted drone attacks and terrorist detention centers, and signed a policy directive to guide future operations.

Attorney General Eric Holder sent this letter on May 22, 2013, to U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, addressing accountability, transparency, and legality of U.S. counterterrorism operations. He discloses previously classified information regarding the deaths of four U.S. citizens involved in terrorist groups, who were "outside the area of active hostilities" and were targeted by lethal drone attacks. This letter came before President Obama's speech at the National Defense University and his Presidential Policy Directive, which outline the administration's policies regarding counterterrorism operations, including drones and terrorist detention camps. See also the Department of Justice Memo: Lawfulness of a Lethal Operation Directed Against a U.S. Citizen who is a Senior Operational Leader of Al Qa'ida or An Associated Force.

NBC News published this Department of Justice confidential white paper on February 5, 2013, which outlines the legal framework that would allow the U.S. government to "use lethal force in a foreign country" against a U.S. citizen highly involved with al-Qaeda or its associates. A bipartisan group of U.S. senators requested all classified documents related to the legality of targeted killings of Americans be released.

This Congressional Reseach Service report briefly summarizes the legal issues raised by the choice of forum for trying accused terrorists, and provides a chart comparing selected military commissions rules under the Military Commissions Act to the corresponding rules that apply in federal court.

Attorney General Eric Holder gave these remarks regarding targeted killing at at Northwestern University School of Law on March 5, 2012.

Ed Husain argues that the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki has undermined core American values and principles.

Guantanamo Bay, where hundreds of terror suspects have been detained since 9/11, has underscored the need for flexibility and careful balancing in detainee policy to confront twenty-first-century threats, writes CFR's Matthew Waxman.

The Obama administration will argue its operation against Osama bin Laden in Pakistan observed both U.S. and international law, and it appears any challenges will be mute, writes CFR's John Bellinger.

William Shawcross believes the United State should use the Nuremberg trials as a precedent when evaluating future legal proceedings against Al Qaeda and its associates.

Tim Starks and Seth Stern of Congressional Quarterly argue that after nearly a full decade into the war on terrorism the United States still lacks a legal framework for what is widely seen as the top national security threat of the modern era.

The Ghailani verdict focuses renewed attention on the debate over how to detain and prosecute terrorism suspects, which will persist until the Obama administration comes up with a firm policy, says CFR's Matthew Waxman.

A snag in the civilian trial of Guantanamo detainee Ahmed Ghalani could be a setback for Obama administration efforts to close Guantanamo.

Noah Feldman says the Obama administration faces both old and new legal challenges over U.S. defense strategies.

The Supreme Court's upholding of bans on "material support" for foreign terror groups, even involving legal activities, reflects a further post-9/11 broadening of federal powers, writes CFR's Matthew C. Waxman.

The Times Square bomb plot has triggered questions about when and whether suspect Faisal Shahzad, a Pakistan-born American citizen, should have been informed of his Miranda rights. These questions are likely to gain traction in the weeks ahead, says expert Matthew C. Waxman, who believes it would be wrong to treat all captured terrorists as enemy combatants subject to military trial.

Edward Alden says that the Supreme Court ruling on the terrorism case, Ashcroft v. Iqbal, makes it difficult for many other lawsuits to proceed.

Benn Steil and Peter Wallison argue that trying alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed before the military commission established by Congress is better than the Obama administration pretending that it accepts the legal implications of acquittal by a civilian court.