"I'm Just a Mom!" Daphne Lee Gives Powerful Speech Against NDAA in Clark County, Nevada. Three myths about the detention bill. Condemnation of President Obama is intense, and growing, as a result of his announced intent to sign into law the indefinite detention bill embedded in the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). These denunciations come not only from the nation’s leading civil liberties and human rights groups, but also from the pro-Obama New York Times Editorial Page, which today has a scathing Editorial describing Obama’s stance as “a complete political cave-in, one that reinforces the impression of a fumbling presidency” and lamenting that “the bill has so many other objectionable aspects that we can’t go into them all,” as well as from vocal Obama supporters such as Andrew Sullivan, who wrote yesterday that this episode is “another sign that his campaign pledge to be vigilant about civil liberties in the war on terror was a lie.”
In damage control mode, White-House-allied groups are now trying to ride to the rescue with attacks on the ACLU and dismissive belittling of the bill’s dangers. Why You Should Be Outraged About The Ruling To Keep The National Defense Authorization In Effect. On Tuesday a federal appeals court ruled the government can indefinitely detain anyone, at least until the courts decide whether to permanently block or confirm the indefinite detention clause (i.e. §1021) of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act. That the NDAA is fully enforceable right now is scary enough, but the details of the ruling are truly bothersome to those that have been following the rulings in the case.
First, a recap why §1021 was ruled unconstitutional and how the government reacted. Journalists and activists sued to stop the provisions, which allow the government to indefinitely detain anyone who provides "substantial support" to the Taliban, al-Qaeda or "associated forces," including "any person who has committed a belligerent act" in the aid of enemy forces. The government then argued that it "construes the reach of the injunction to apply only to the plaintiffs before the Court. " But Judge Forrest was careful to protect the AUMF. Sen. Paul: New indefinite detention rule puts every American at risk.
By Eric W. DolanTuesday, November 29, 2011 16:32 EDT Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) released a video on Tuesday in which he blasted a controversial provision in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which the Senate is debating this week. The provision would authorize the military to indefinitely detain individuals — including U.S. citizens — without charge or trial.
“If these provisions pass, we could see American citizens being sent to Guantanamo Bay,” Rand said in the video. “There is one thing and one thing only protecting innocent Americans from being detained at will at the hands of a too-powerful state — our Constitution, and the checks we put on government power,” he continued. “Detaining citizens without a court trial is not American. The bill was drafted by Sens. The Secretary of Defense, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation have all sent letters to Congress opposing the indefinite detention provision. Eric W. Eric W. Detainee policy gone horribly awry. December 01, 2011 10:00 AMDetainee policy gone horribly awry By Steve Benen The White House, the Pentagon, the FBI, the CIA, and the director of national intelligence, and the head of the Justice Department’s national security division all told senators the same thing: yesterday’s Senate vote on indefinite detention was a bad idea.
It didn’t matter. Dahlia Lithwick explained: On Tuesday 60 members of the United States Senate voted to preserve a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act — that would be the bill that funds the Pentagon — allowing the U.S. military to pick up and detain, without charges or trial, anyone suspected of terrorism, including American citizens, and to restrict transfers of prisoners out of Guantanamo Bay. President Obama has said he will veto the larger bill if the detainee provision remains intact, but that hasn’t been enough to sway the Senate. Just 38 senators did the right thing when the measure reached the Senate floor. Does the NDAA Authorize Detention of US Citizens? [THIRD UPDATE (12/9/11): See here for my updated assessment as to US citizens captured abroad.] [SECOND UPDATE (12/7/11): Thanks to a flood of emails and calls, I am aware that a great many readers remain unaware that the Senate bill was amended after my original post below, in a manner that explicitly states that the NDAA should not be read as affirming or prohibiting citizen detention.
I've written this post to explain exactly what this would mean.] [UPDATE: As most readers know, the Senate subsequent to my post below adopted an amendment speaking directly to this issue. A post noting this development appears here already, but I've been encouraged by some readers who do not normally follow this blog to include this update in this post in order to avoid confusion. Here is why this is confusing: S. 1867 originally contained language to the effect that citizens are not subject to detention solely to the extent forbidden by the Constitution. So how does this compare to the status quo? Senate Wants the Military to Lock You Up Without Trial | Danger Room. Here’s the best thing that can be said about the new detention powers the Senate has tucked into next year’s defense bill: They don’t force the military to detain American citizens indefinitely without a trial. They just let the military do that.
And even though the leaders of the military and the spy community have said they want no such power, the Senate is poised to pass its bill as early as tonight. There are still changes swirling around the Senate, but this looks like the basic shape of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act. Someone the government says is “a member of, or part of, al-Qaida or an associated force” can be held in military custody “without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.”
Those hostilities are currently scheduled to end the Wednesday after never. The move would shut down criminal trials for terror suspects. Which is ironic. Weirder still, the bill’s chief architect, Sen. Photo: U.S. The National Defense Authorization Act is the Greatest Threat to Civil Liberties Americans Face. Judge blocks indefinite military detention provision.