The War on Drugs is a War on Us. And no government should have the power to kill people simply because it suspects them of a drug offense.

Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) has joined a letter to Congress supporting accountability for Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, including articles of impeachment introduced by Republican Congressman Thomas Massie.

The letter, led by Demand Progress, brings together a diverse coalition of organizations working on drug policy reform, civil liberties, human rights, government accountability, and foreign policy. Signatories include Oxfam America, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), Drug Policy Alliance, Our Revolution, Action Corps, Common Defense, Win Without War, Peace Action, The Chamberlain Network, Latin America Working Group (LAWG), Alliance of Baptists, RootsAction, International Drug Law Advocacy & Resource Center (ILDARC), New Jewish Narrative, The Libertarian Institute, CODEPINK, Hawai’i Health and Harm Reduction Center, Center for International Policy Advocacy, September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows, MPower Change Action Fund, ReThinking Foreign Policy, Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP), Veterans Action Council, IMEU Policy Project, Campaign for Peace, Disarmament and Common Security, Free Speech For People, A New PATH (Parents for Addiction Treatment & Healing), Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, Yemeni Alliance Committee, Defending Rights & Dissent, Minnesota Peace Project, Antiwar.com, Lawyers for Good Government Action Fund, Human Rights and the Drug War, United for Peace and Justice, National Iranian American Council Action, The Porchlight Collective SAP, Center for Economic and Policy Research, and Peace, Justice, Sustainability, NOW.

These organizations do not necessarily agree on every issue, but they have come together around a shared demand for accountability and the principle that executive power must have limits.

SSDP is a strictly nonpartisan organization. We work with Republicans, Democrats, both “Big L” and “little l” libertarians, independents, and people across the political spectrum who share our commitment to drug policies grounded in science, compassion, and human rights. We do not endorse political candidates, and we do not take positions on issues outside our mission.

So why are we weighing in on the impeachment of a Cabinet secretary?

Because one of the central allegations concerns the extrajudicial killing of people suspected of drug trafficking. And that is absolutely a drug policy issue.

Drug Trafficking Allegations Are Not Death Sentences

The articles of impeachment accuse Secretary Hegseth of overseeing military strikes against boats carrying people suspected of drug trafficking in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific. They also allege that a follow-up strike killed survivors of an initial attack.

As the letter explains:

The articles also charge Secretary Hegseth with extrajudicial killings for using military strikes against boats carrying people suspected of drug trafficking. They allege that a follow-up strike killed survivors of an initial attack. Suspected drug trafficking is a matter for law enforcement. The executive branch cannot claim the power to kill criminal suspects on the strength of its own accusations.

That distinction is fundamental.

An accusation is not a conviction. Drug trafficking is not an act of war. And the government cannot appoint itself judge, jury, and executioner.

The right to due process does not disappear because someone is accused of involvement with drugs. Neither does the right to life.

For decades, the War on Drugs has been used to justify increasingly aggressive policing, militarization, mass incarceration, and violations of fundamental human rights. We have seen what happens when governments treat people suspected of drug offenses as enemies rather than human beings entitled to the protection of the law.

Using military force to kill suspected drug traffickers without trial represents an especially dangerous escalation of that same failed approach.

The administration has defended the strikes as part of an armed conflict against drug cartels, while legal experts and lawmakers have challenged that justification. But even serious allegations of drug trafficking do not, by themselves, establish that someone is a lawful military target.

We Raised These Concerns at the United Nations

This is not a new concern for SSDP.

Earlier this year, at the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) in Vienna, SSDP participated in international drug policy discussions examining the consequences of the War on Drugs and the importance of protecting human rights.

The Commission on Narcotic Drugs is the United Nations’ central policymaking body on drug-related matters. It is precisely where the international community should confront the consequences of punitive and militarized drug policies.

The militarization of drug enforcement is not unique to the United States. Around the world, the War on Drugs has been invoked to justify violence, undermine due process, and erode fundamental human rights.

Our message to the international community is the same principle guiding our decision to sign this letter: Drug policy must be grounded in science, compassion, and human rights. No government should be above the law, and no person should be denied due process because of a suspected drug offense.

Watch SSDP at the 2026 United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs:

This Is Not About Republicans or Democrats

SSDP’s opposition to extrajudicial killings is not contingent on who occupies the White House. We would oppose these actions under a Republican president, a Democratic president, or any other administration. The same constitutional protections and human rights must apply regardless of who holds power.

Indeed, the articles of impeachment at issue were introduced by Republican Congressman Thomas Massie. Concerns about executive overreach, due process, and the militarization of drug enforcement cross ideological and partisan lines.

Our movement has always brought together people who disagree on many political questions but recognize that the War on Drugs has failed. Some approach drug policy reform through public health. Others through civil liberties, limited government, criminal justice reform, or individual freedom.

We do not have to agree on everything to agree that the government should not be killing people on suspicion of drug crimes.

This is not about choosing a political side. It is about holding every administration to the same standards and refusing to allow drug prohibition to become an excuse for unchecked government violence.

Accountability Is a Drug Policy Issue

The letter addresses several allegations involving Secretary Hegseth, including matters beyond SSDP’s organizational mission. Our decision to sign is grounded specifically in our opposition to extrajudicial killings justified in the name of drug enforcement.

We believe Congress has a responsibility to investigate these allegations, exercise its constitutional oversight authority, and hold government officials accountable where wrongdoing is established.

That principle is bigger than any administration, political party, or individual official.

The War on Drugs has already cost far too many lives. It has separated families, undermined public health, eroded civil liberties, and normalized extraordinary government powers in the name of controlling substances.

We cannot allow it to become a justification for summary executions.

SSDP will continue working with allies across the political spectrum to end the War on Drugs and advance policies rooted in science, compassion, and human rights.

Because the War on Drugs is a War on Us. And human rights are not partisan.

Read the full letter to Congress: