When the U.S. courts decided, back in the Bush days, that the U.S. Constitution applied not just to its own citizens, but to everybody we interacted with? Nobody thought through the consequences. If it applies to everybody, it applies to nobody. That is, whatever rules you can make about killing non-combatants in a foreign land, you can make about your own folks right here at home.
And that is where we're headed.
It's like we're having to re-learn the rules of nation-states again: why they exist, why they have embassies, why they're polite to one another even when they do bad things, why they keep certain things secret, and so on. In the constitution issue, it's the rules of the way the country operates, as understood by its citizens, that make them give a crap about it. (Not the rules as applied. The rules as understood by the common person.) You start publicly saying that it's a sucky deal? Soon enough people will believe you. In the U.S. domestic arena, if you treat all of your citizens as if they all might be violent at any time and deserve close watching? They'll live up to that expectation.
I don't like any of it, any violence at all. I understand it exists whether I like it or not, and I understand that international politics is a messy affair. But there are supposed to be some grown-ups involved that keep it all heading in a good direction. Those people have left the room. Decades ago. (Note: my comment was about trends, not current politicians. I don't argue about current politicians and try not to mention any of them if I can. Trends are much more important.)