We can have a long legal argument about whether the Obama administration's white paper on drone strikes is any good.
What I will say is that there is a certain mindset shared by many of my legal colleagues that is sort of the lawyer's version of the Red Dawn fantasy. If you just prove something is illegal, then some judge will order it illegal and put a stop to it!!
No. When Big Brother is really coming for us, the judges will be part of it and even if they aren't, the orders they issue won't be worth the paper they're printed on. Legal remedies are irrelevant.
If you don't like the drone policy, you must check it with politics. If the "it's illegal!!111!11one!!!11" argument is in furtherance of a political argument, fine. But the courts will not save you. The generation before us that was bailed out time and again by an anomalous run of progressive decisions from the Supreme Court experienced the exception to the rule.
Forget arguing legal this/legal that commander-in-chief this/commander-in-chief that. Either it's a political issue that a mass of political people care about and will do something about, or the drones will fly.
It's as simple as that. So, like any good election season diary, what this means is "GOTV" and leave the academic papers at school.
(Also, too, this is why it's incredibly myopic to keep the filibuster. People who espouse bad policies must own them politically).