Appeals Court Says Obama Administration Can Indefinitely Detain Americans

[bluedeathray]

Due process is being ignored, run over, and marginalized.

But don't worry, despite NDAA, Guantanamo, the Patriot Act, and Prism, he promises (in his signing statement) he won't abuse the privilege.


http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/surveillance-state-appeals-court-says-obama-administration-can-indefinitely-detain?akid=10708.1077804.VQZpqr&rd=1&src=newsletter870748&t=21

[deurbano]

1. Crap.

<<
 In news that is sure to make Obama's critics worry, and Obama's most ardent supporters also worry, the administration has won the latest (of surely many) round regarding granting it the power to indefinitely detain U.S. citizens and foreigners suspected of being affiliated with terrorist syndicates, all under the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012. Congress has also granted the president authority to arrest and hold suspects without due process under the NDAA—a privilege the president said, in a signing statement, that he will not be abusing.

The indefinite detention provision of the NDAA faced a federal lawsuit, brought by Pulitzer-prize winning journalist Chris Hedges and others. The plaintiffs had previously be successful in convincing the federal district judge to keep such executive power from being signed into the books. But an Apeals court has now overturned that lower-court decision, saying that Hedges and his cohorts have no standing in the case. >>

[hlthe2b]

2. I think I have to agree with former President Carter...

Our constitution continues to be ignored and its protections denied. What will become of the Democracy that once was the envy of the world?

I hate feeling helpless. I hate that so much of this is happening on a Democrat's watch.

[phleshdef]

3. False. Thats not what the court said at all.

The court said that the NDAA in question never allowed for the indefinite detention of Americans to begin with, so the plaintiffs therefore had no standing because they were suing over a violation that doesn't exist.

[COLGATE4]

4. There you go again - stating all those

pesky facts. Ruins a good rant.

[bluedeathray]

7. The ruling opens the door to add

"Indefinite detention" to the NDAA. As I understood it.

The fact that it didn't exist before was the method by which the Appeals court struck down the earlier ruling.

Also the fact that this is being debated at ALL is indicative of how far the Constitution is being ignored.

[phleshdef]

8. I don't see where you are getting that from at all.

For one, there is no 1 NDAA. There is a new NDAA passed every year to fund defense stuff and the military.

The court said the law doesn't give anyone the right to indefinitely detain an American. That's a good thing.

[bluedeathray]

11. Renewal seems

To add opportunity to increase powers. Upon further research, I've found several sites that offer conflicted information. Here's a quote from one:

"Some argue that the bill does not allow the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens because one part of the bill states that it will not change the law in regards to the detention of U.S. citizens. However, with further examination, it becomes clear that another part of the bill actually states that it will change the law. From this, another argument arises which is that the provisions are too vague..."
http://www.policymic.com/articles/22288/ndaa-2013-allows-indefinite-detention-of-u-s-citizens-by-president

If nothing else, it seems the issue is plenty ambiguous. I do not trust politicians to act in our interests as a nations.

But that's an opinion. Not a fact.

No one has a crystal ball in terms of determining what the government will claim as far as power goes.

I really hope you're right.

[bemildred]

12. Well, consider that the IRS says "exclusively" means more than 50% when it comes to nonprofits.

Just apropos of the government's abilities to misconstrue the law when it is not ambiguous.

[struggle4progress]

5. "I didn't actually read the decision so now I've gotta just make up some shit"

[FiveGoodMen]

6. Anyone who's okay with this is a traitor.

[phleshdef]

9. Except for those of us that actually read and understand the court's decision...

...which isn't anything resembling the false narrative being pushed by this OP.

[bemildred]

10. I consider that decision alone more than enough to remove the judge. nt