[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Dead Constitution See other Dead Constitution Articles Title: Obama's NDAA Law Allowing Indefinite Military Detention of Citizens Ruled Unconstitutional By Nick Pinto Thu., Sep. 13 2012 at 12:15 AM The Obama administration's efforts to enshrine sweeping 9/11-era rollbacks of civil liberties and constitutional rights as federal law hit a serious roadblock yesterday, as a federal judge struck down clauses of the National Defense Authorization Act as unconstitutional. The offending section of the NDAA, signed by Obama on New Year's Eve last year, grants the government the power to put citizens in military detention indefinitely and without the usual recourse to civil courts. Chris Hedges, along with other writers and activists including Daniel Ellsberg, Noam Chomsky, and Naomi Wolf, challenged the law soon after in a federal lawsuit. They argued that the phrasing of the law, which allows for the detention of anyone who has "substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners," is so broad that in infringes on their own first-amendment rights. Judge Katherine Forrest, a recent Obama appointee to the federal bench, was clearly sympathetic, and granted a preliminary injunction of the offending sections of the law. The parties were back in court for further arguments last month for further arguments, but by Forrest's close questioning of administration lawyers, it was clear she still wasn't buying the government's argument. That impression was confirmed yesterday with Forrest's 112-page ruling, which resoundingly dismisses the law as unconstitutional: First amendment rights aren't the only constitutional problem with the law, Forrest continues: Forrest is particularly dismissive of the government's argument that the issue is none of the court's business, and that at most, courts can consider individual habeas corpus petitions from already-detained prisoners. Speaking with the Voice Wednesday night, Hedges said he is happy with the ruling. "I'm elated," he said. "This judge is amazing. She had the courage to do the right thing in an age when most judges write long opinions about why they can't do the right thing." There's good reason to temper the elation, however. The government is almost certain to appeal the ruling. Indeed, the administration already has appealed the temporary injunction granted in May. "That's all right," Hedges said Wednsday. "If they appeal, we'll fight them, and we'll keep fighting them, and we'll fight them until we win." You can read Judge Forrest's ruling here: Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: farmfriend, 4 (#0)
abovethelaw.com/2011/05/c...-is-pretty-stinking-rich/ Sharp, talented, rich cookie; what's not to like? “The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||