The complaint argues that the deadly strikes on alleged drug boats, which have killed at least 87 people since early September, are illegal.

A coalition of advocacy groups filed a lawsuit Tuesday against the Trump administration seeking the immediate release of the memo that provides the legal justification for U.S. military strikes on alleged drug boats.

The complaint, filed in federal court in Manhattan, argues that the deadly strikes, which have killed at least 87 people since early September, are illegal and that Americans deserve to see the justification for them.

The filing requests that the court order the Justice, State and Defense Departments to immediately search for all records regarding the legal reasoning behind the U.S. military campaign against the alleged drug boats and to release them to the American Civil Liberties Union, or ACLU, and other plaintiffs, including the New York Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Constitutional Rights.

"We think that the public deserves to know how our government is justifying the cold-blooded murder of civilians as lawful," Jeffrey Stein, attorney for the ACLU, said in an interview. "We think that the Trump administration needs to stop these illegal and immoral strikes immediately, and that the officials who have carried them out must be held accountable, not gifted a `Get Out of Jail Free card.`"

The Defense Department said it does not comment on pending or ongoing litigation. The Justice Department also declined to comment.

The U.S. military has conducted at least 22 strikes against boats that the Trump administration says were carrying drugs destined for the U.S. The administration has described the crew members targeted in the strikes as smugglers working on behalf of cartels.

The first strike, on Sept. 2, has become the subject of intense scrutiny after it was reported that two people survived an initial strike on the boat but were later killed in a second one ordered by Adm. Frank "Mitch" Bradley, the commander overseeing the attacks. Some legal experts and Democratic politicians have argued that the follow-up strike, often known as a "double tap," violated international law because it targeted two people who were in an incapacitated craft in open waters.

Bradley and Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, briefed lawmakers on Capitol Hill last week. Reaction to the briefings was split down party lines, with Republicans defending the follow-up strikes and Democrats expressing continued concern.

The advocacy groups said they filed their lawsuit after the government failed to respond to a Freedom of Information Act request for the documents filed on Oct. 15.

"By claiming that these attacks are legal while refusing to provide any evidence or rationale, Trump shows once again his disdain for basic transparency, human rights, and the rule of law," Ify Chikezie, staff attorney at the New York Civil Liberties Union, wrote in a statement. "The courts must step in and order the administration to release these documents immediately."

Stein, of the ACLU, said administrations have routinely released legal justification memos in the past, including regarding sensitive military operations, because they discuss the principles of constitutional law, and classified details can be redacted.

In 2011, the Obama administration released a memo explaining why the Justice Department believed U.S. military operations in Libya were in the national interest and that then-President Barack Obama could initiate them without prior authorization from Congress.

And during Trump`s first administration, the Justice Department released its legal memo justifying U.S. military strikes on three Syrian chemical weapons facilities.

Stein said he disagrees with some who have argued that the strikes amount to war crimes.

"We are not in a war, and so any discussion of these illegal strikes as war crimes is inaccurate," he said. "The law of armed conflict does not apply to these strikes. They are premeditated killings outside of the context of armed conflict, and we have a legal concept for that conduct. It`s murder."