National Defense Authorization Act (S. 1867)

[opie]

Stop Indefinite Detention of U.S. Citizens Without Due Process

Deep inside the National Defense Authorization Act (S. 1867) that the Senate is currently considering is a dangerous and unconstitutional portion that needs to be stripped out. Congress would grant the President the power to use the military in order to detain certain individuals, including American citizens, without trial or due process, indefinitely.

Section 1031 of the National Defense Authorization Act reads: “Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force … includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons…. [including] [d]etention under the law of war without trial....” This “indefinite detention” section hands over to the Executive Branch the power to have the military arrest U.S. citizens. No trial needed. Simple suspicion would suffice.

This could be quite reminiscent of Stalinist Russia where a knock on the door in the middle of the night meant that the person taken by the military was often never seen again, perhaps having been imprisoned in Siberia or executed. The Japanese American Citizens League has warned that this measure’s detention principles are similar to the ones that sent innocent Japanese-Americans into concentration camps during WW II.

Sadly, this bill has already been passed in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives with nary a whimper by a 322-96 vote. The excuse given for such an egregious disregard for the Constitution by supporters of the bill including authors Senators John McCain (R- Ariz.) and Carl Levin (D-Mich.) is that the provision would strengthen and codify the legal framework necessary for dealing with “terrorists.” Other supporters insist that the language doesn’t necessarily include American citizens.

U.S. Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) who voted against the bill in the House, thinks differently. Amash says the act would indeed “permit the federal government to indefinitely detain American citizens on American soil, without charge or trial, at the discretion of the President.” He notes that the language “does not preclude U.S. citizens from being detained indefinitely, without charge or trial, it simply makes such detention discretionary,” therefore it is misleading and outrageous.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is speaking out in opposition to the "indefinite detainment" provision of S. 1867. He is also offering an amendment that would simply strike out Section 1031 of the bill.

Sen. Rand Paul Defends American Citizens Against Indefinite Detainment

[fiveo]

I saw this the other day. I can't believe how much our 'leaders' are attempting to erode more and more of the Constitution. It's absolutely outrageous

[tonyparks]

Have you seen 24 Drama, because I have!

[opie]

Nov 29, 2011 21:16:51 GMT -5 fiveo said:

I saw this the other day. I can't believe how much our 'leaders' are attempting to erode more and more of the Constitution. It's absolutely outrageous

Good news!...for now...

The Senate has overwhelmingly voted down an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would have provided oversight to check the military's power to arrest U.S. citizens as suspected terrorists on American soil and detain them indefinitely without trial.

[redstone14]

This could be quite reminiscent of Stalinist Russia where a knock on the door in the middle of the night meant that the person taken by the military was often never seen again, perhaps having been imprisoned in Siberia or executed.

Written by someone who had first hand experience with such things............

"And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling in terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? [...] The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!" —Alexander Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago (Chapter 1 "Arrest")

That's why we have the Second Amendment.

[opie]

Rand Paul: Americans Could Be Sent to Gitmo Under 'Indefinite Detention' Bill
Senator tells Judge Napolitano bill completely violates Constitution

[redstone14]

Nov 30, 2011 10:12:25 GMT -5 opie said:

Rand Paul: Americans Could Be Sent to Gitmo Under 'Indefinite Detention' Bill
Senator tells Judge Napolitano bill completely violates Constitution

Interesting, one gets a queezy feeling when watching something like this.

When Benjamin Franklin was asked, “What kind of government have you given us?” His reply was, "A republic if you can keep it.” Our politicians had better keep that in mind or there will be hell to pay in their future.

[opie]

'Indefinite Detention' Bill Passes Senate 93-7

Americans completely stripped of all rights under Section 1031

Thursday, December 1, 2011

The Senate last night codified into law the power of the U.S. military to indefinitely detain an American citizen with no charge, no trial and no oversight whatsoever with the passage of S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act.

One amendment that would have specifically blocked the measures from being used against U.S. citizens was voted down and the final bill was passed 93-7.

Another amendment introduced by Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein that attempted to bar the provision from being used on American soil, an effort to ensure "the military won't be roaming our streets looking for suspected terrorists," also failed, although Feinstein voted in favor of the bill anyway.

Feinstein was able to include a largely symbolic amendment which states that "nothing in the bill changes current law relating to the detention of U.S. citizens and legal aliens," but this measure is meaningless according to Republican Congressman Justin Amash, a fierce critic of the bill.

"Some have asserted that Sen. Feinstein's amendment, S Amdt 1456, protects the rights of American citizens and preserves constitutional due process. Unfortunately, it does not. It's just more cleverly worded nonsense," Amash wrote on his Facebook page.

Though the White House has threatened to veto the bill, the fact that Obama administration lawyers yesterday reaffirmed their backing for state sponsored assassination of U.S. citizens would suggest otherwise. Not voting for the bill, or in other words upholding the oath to protect the Constitution, has been described over and over again as "political suicide".

"The bill puts military detention authority on steroids and makes it permanent, American citizens and others are at greater risk of being locked away by the military without charge or trial," said Christopher Anders, senior legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union.

As Spencer Ackerman highlights, the bill completely violates the sixth amendment in that it allows American citizens to be locked up indefinitely, including in a foreign detention center, without any burden of proof whatsoever. An American merely has to be declared a terrorist and they can be abducted off the streets and never seen again.

"The detention mandate to use indefinite military detention in terrorism cases isn’t limited to foreigners. It’s confusing, because two different sections of the bill seem to contradict each other, but in the judgment of the University of Texas’ Robert Chesney — a nonpartisan authority on military detention — “U.S. citizens are included in the grant of detention authority,” writes Ackerman.

[redstone14]

Feinstein was able to include a largely symbolic amendment which states that "nothing in the bill changes current law relating to the detention of U.S. citizens and legal aliens," but this measure is meaningless according to Republican Congressman Justin Amash, a fierce critic of the bill.

In the meantime the backdoor is open at the border and they sue the states when they try to legally detain illegal aliens. Makes sense to me.