Administration Asks Appeals Court for Stay on Indefinite Detention Ban, Triggers Constitutional Showdown by CHRIS HEDGES, TRUTHDIG
Administration Asks Appeals Court for Stay on Indefinite Detention Ban, Triggers Constitutional Showdown
Monday, 17 September 2012 10:30 By Chris Hedges, Truthdig | News Analysis
In January I sued President Barack Obama over Section 1021(b)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which authorized the military to detain U.S. citizens indefinitely, strip them of due process and hold them in military facilities, including offshore penal colonies. Last week, round one in the battle to strike down the onerous provision, one that saw me joined by six other plaintiffs including Noam Chomsky and Daniel Ellsberg, ended in an unqualified victory for the public. U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest, who accepted every one of our challenges to the law, made her temporary injunction of the section permanent. In short, she declared the law unconstitutional.
Almost immediately after Judge Forrest ruled, the Obama administration challenged the decision. Government prosecutors called the opinion “unprecedented” and said that “the government has compelling arguments that it should be reversed.” The government added that it was an “extraordinary injunction of worldwide scope.” Government lawyers asked late Friday for an immediate stay of Forrest’s ban on the use of the military in domestic policing and on the empowering of the government to strip U.S. citizens of due process. The request for a stay was an attempt by the government to get the judge, pending appeal to a higher court, to grant it the right to continue to use the law. Forrest swiftly rejected the stay, setting in motion a fast-paced appeal to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and possibly, if her ruling is upheld there, to the Supreme Court of the United States. The Justice Department sent a letter to Forrest and the 2nd Circuit late Friday night informing them that at 9 a.m. Monday the Obama administration would ask the 2nd Circuit for an emergency stay that would lift Forrest’s injunction. This would allow Obama to continue to operate with indefinite detention authority until a formal appeal was heard. The government’s decision has triggered a constitutional showdown between the president and the judiciary.
“This may be the most significant constitutional standoff since the Pentagon Papers case,” said Carl Mayer, co-lead counsel for the plaintiffs.
“The administration of President Obama within the last 48 hours has decided to engage in an all-out campaign to block and overturn an order of a federal judge,” said co-lead counsel Bruce Afran. “As Judge Forrest noted in her opinion, nothing is more fundamental in American law than the possibility that journalists, activists and citizens could lose their liberty, potentially forever, and the Obama administration has now lined up squarely with the most conservative elements of the Republican Party to undermine Americans’ civil liberties.”
The request by the government to keep the law on the books during the appeal process raises a disturbing question. If the administration is this anxious to restore this section of the NDAA, is it because the Obama government has already used it? Or does it have plans to use the section in the immediate future?
“A Department of Homeland Security bulletin was issued Friday claiming that the riots [in the Middle East] are likely to come to the U.S. and saying that DHS is looking for the Islamic leaders of these likely riots,” Afran said. “It is my view that this is why the government wants to reopen the NDAA—so it has a tool to round up would-be Islamic protesters before they can launch any protest, violent or otherwise. Right now there are no legal tools to arrest would-be protesters. The NDAA would give the government such power. Since the request to vacate the injunction only comes about on the day of the riots, and following the DHS bulletin, it seems to me that the two are connected. The government wants to reopen the NDAA injunction so that they can use it to block protests.”
The decision to vigorously fight Forrest’s ruling is a further example of the Obama White House’s steady and relentless assault against civil liberties, an assault that is more severe than that carried out by George W. Bush. Obama has refused to restore habeas corpus. He supports the FISA Amendment Act, which retroactively makes legal what under our Constitution has traditionally been illegal—warrantless wire tapping, eavesdropping and monitoring directed against U.S. citizens. He has used the Espionage Act six times against whistle-blowers who have exposed government crimes, including war crimes, to the public. He interprets the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force Act as giving him the authority to assassinate U.S. citizens, as he did the cleric Anwar al-Awlaki. And now he wants the right to use the armed forces to throw U.S. citizens into military prisons, where they will have no right to a trial and no defined length of detention.
Liberal apologists for Barack Obama should read Judge Forrest’s 112-page ruling. It is a chilling explication and denunciation of the massive erosion of the separation of powers. It courageously challenges the overreach of Congress and the executive branch in stripping Americans of some of our most cherished constitutional rights.
In the last 220 years there have been only about 135 judicial rulings that have struck down an act of Congress. Most of the cases involved abortion or pornography. Very few dealt with wartime powers and the separation of powers, or what Forrest in her opinion called “a question of defining an individual’s core liberties.”
Section 1021(b)(2) authorizes the military to detain any U.S. citizen who “substantially supported” al-Qaida, the Taliban or “associated forces” and then hold them in military compounds until “the end of hostilities.” The vagueness of the language, and the refusal to exempt journalists, means that those of us who as part of our reporting have direct contact with individuals or groups deemed to be part of a terrorist network can find ourselves seized and detained under the provision.
“The Government was unable to offer definitions for the phrases ‘substantially support’ or ‘directly support,’ ” the judge wrote. “In particular, when the Court asked for one example of what ‘substantially support’ means, the Government stated, ‘I’m not in a position to give one specific example.’ When asked about the phrase ‘directly support,’ the Government stated, ‘I have not thought through exactly and we have not come to a position on ‘direct support’ and what that means.’ In its pre-trial memoranda, the Government also did not provide any definitional examples for those terms.”
The judge’s ruling asked whether a news article deemed by authorities as favorable to the Taliban could be interpreted as having “substantially supported” the Taliban.
“How about a YouTube video?” she went on. “Where is the line between what the government would consider ‘journalistic reporting’ and ‘propaganda?’ Who will make such determinations? Will there be an office established to read articles, watch videos, and evaluate speeches in order to make judgments along a spectrum of where the support is ‘modest’ or ‘substantial?’ “
Forrest concurred with the plaintiffs that the statute violated our free speech rights and due-process guarantees. She noted that “the Court repeatedly asked the Government whether those particular past activities could subject plaintiffs to indefinite detention; the Government refused to answer.” The judge went on to criticize the nebulous language of the law, chastising the government because it “did not provide particular definitions.” She wrote that “the statute’s vagueness falls far short of what due process requires.”
Although government lawyers argued during the trial that the law represented no change from prior legislation, they now assert that blocking it imperils the nation’s security. It is one of numerous contradictions in the government’s case, many of which were illuminated in Forrest’s opinion. The government, she wrote, “argues that no future administration could interpret § 1021(b)(2) or the AUMF differently because the two are so clearly the same. That frankly makes no sense, particularly in light of the Government’s inability at the March and August hearings to define certain terms in—or the scope of—§ 1021(b)(2).” The judge said that “Section 1021 appears to be a legislative attempt at an ex post facto ‘fix’: to provide the President (in 2012) with broader detention authority than was provided in the AUMF [Authorization to Use Military Force Act] in 2001 and to try and ratify past detentions which may have occurred under an overly-broad interpretation of the AUMF.”
The government, in effect, is attempting to push though a law similar to the legislation that permitted the government to intern 110,000 Japanese-Americans during World War II. This law, if it comes back into force, would facilitate the mass internment of Muslim Americans as well as those deemed to “support” groups or activities defined as terrorist by the state. Calling the 1944 ruling “an embarrassment,” Forrest referred to Korematsu v. United States, which upheld the government’s internment of Japanese-Americans.
The judge said in her opinion that the government “did not submit any evidence in support of its positions. It did not call a single witness, submit a single declaration, or offer a single document at any point during these proceedings.” She went on to write that she found “the testimony of each plaintiff credible.”
“At the March hearing, the Court asked whether Hedges’ activities could subject him to detention under § 1021; the Government stated that it was not prepared to address that question. When asked a similar question at the August hearing, five months later, the Government remained unwilling to state whether any of plaintiffs’ (including Hedges’s) protected First Amendment future activities could subject him or her to detention under § 1021. This Court finds that Hedges has a reasonable fear of detention pursuant to § 1021(b)(2).”
The government has now lost four times in a litigation that has gone on almost nine months. It lost the preliminary injunction in May. It lost a motion for reconsideration shortly thereafter. It lost the permanent injunction. It lost its request last week for a stay. We won’t stop fighting this, but it is deeply disturbing that the Obama administration, rather than protecting our civil liberties and democracy, insists on further eroding them by expanding the power of the military to seize U.S. citizens and control our streets.
- Obama Appeals NDAA, Indefinite Detention Ban. Media Ignores it. (libertycrier.com)
- Americans already detained under NDAA? (alethonews.wordpress.com)
- Americans Already Detained Under NDAA? (alexanderhiggins.com)
- Americans already detained under NDAA? (rt.com)
- Obama fights for indefinite detention (salon.com)
- Administration Asks Appeals Court for Stay on Indefinite Detention Ban, Triggers Constitutional Showdown (lissakr11humanelife.wordpress.com)
- Federal Government Not Willing To Rethink NDAA (personalliberty.com)
- White House demands military prisons for Americans under NDAA (EndtheLie.com)
- We Won – For Now (truthdig.com)
September 29, 2012 - Posted by duckyack | Here And Now | Barack Obama, Forrest, George W. Bush, National Defense Authorization Act, NDAA, Obama, Obama administration, Supreme Court of the United States
No comments yet.
Website under construction
Just Me, Administrator
Where We Stand
This is a Conservative political blog. The Administrator writes under MY TWO SENSE, and all other posts are either re-postings from online news articles and/or commentaries. Readers may comment on any subject as long as the comment is without hate and unacceptable language. Any post, in part or in full, as long as permission is obtained from the original author, may be copied and pasted, and sourced with website link and author. Nothing from this website may be used for commercial or personal gain. Any post under MY TWO SENSE can be reposted as long as it is not for commercial gain, clearly dispays the source link, and sites the author. We believe the above rules fall under the Fair Use Act rules and regulations.
Administrator is retired, cherishes privacy, is a Constitutional Conservative, anti-Obama, DC corruption, and people without the courage to stand up and speak out against the myriad injustices perpetrated by the Obama administration. Administrator's montra; Stand Up and Speak Out about injustices, child abuse, and Constitutional high crimes and treason.
Administrator has very little tolerance for those who will not defend their country against unConstitutional actions taken by the government. And the Administrator has no tolerence for those who are "too busy" with family and job to get involved. We are at war with government corruption at the highest degree in our history, and we are at war with Islam. Both are out to destroy America, and this Administration has done most of the dismantling of our infrastructure, and now, it is helping Muslim extremists murder American citizens without due process, probable cause, and without representation from an attorney. Pick your side, and jump into the fray.
Blogs I Follow
- December 2013 (5)
- November 2013 (22)
- October 2013 (8)
- September 2013 (12)
- August 2013 (27)
- July 2013 (33)
- June 2013 (24)
- May 2013 (78)
- April 2013 (64)
- March 2013 (20)
- February 2013 (9)
- January 2013 (30)
- December 2012 (51)
- November 2012 (53)
- October 2012 (115)
- September 2012 (62)
- August 2012 (47)
- July 2012 (24)
- June 2012 (30)
- WND December 6, 2013White House occupier tells one whopper after another! It’s getting to be a common characteristic of this so-called president. http://www.wnd.com/2013/12/white-house-caught-in-lie-about-obamas-past/Filed under: Home Tagged: White Houseduckyack
- White House caught in lie about Obama’s past December 6, 2013White House caught in lie about Obama’s past.Filed under: Homeduckyack
- White House caught in lie about Obama’s past December 6, 2013White House caught in lie about Obama’s past.Filed under: Homeduckyack
- CANADIAN FREE PRESS . . . BECAUSE WITHOUT AMERICA THERE IS NOT FREE WORLD by ARNOLD AHLERT December 3, 2013(Reprinted under Fair Use Act) http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/mobile/mobile-article/59617#.Up4P12wwsmY.twitter We gave thousands of guns to Mexican drug cartels. Americans died. Where is the outrage? Where Is the Outrage? By Arnold Ahlert Tuesday, December 3, 2013 On Sunday, the New York Post ran an excerpt from “The Unarmed Truth” by John Dodson. Dod […]duckyack
- THE TELLEGRAPH by COLIN FREEMAN (MY TWO SENSE: LOOK HOW FAR WE’VE COME. America is Germany all over again. JM) December 2, 2013Child taken from womb by social services Exclusive: Essex social services have obtained a court order against a woman that allowed her to be forcibly sedated and for her child to be taken from her womb by caesarean section By Colin Freeman 8:58PM GMT 30 Nov 2013 A pregnant woman has had her baby forcibly […]duckyack
- THE BLAZE by ERICA RITZ (MY TWO SENSE: Castration is appropriate here. JM) November 30, 201366-Year-Old Gay Rights Icon Arrested Over Horrific Child Porn Allegations (Graphic Content) Jun. 26, 2012 10:12am Erica Ritz (Photo via the SF Examiner) 66-year-old Larry Brinkin, the first man to use the phrase “domestic partner” in a lawsuit, was arrested in California Friday in connection with felony possession of child pornography, police said. The dist […]duckyack
- THE BLAZE by BECKET ADAMS November 29, 2013Ohio Man Using a Scheme to Snatch Up ‘Abandoned’ Houses That’s So Absurd, It’s Scary to Think It’s Actually Working Nov. 27, 2013 4:17pm Becket Adams A Springdale, Ohio, family was shocked when they returned from a visit to a dying relative to find that a stranger had moved into their house and changed the […]duckyack
- THE BLAZE by BECKET ADAMS (MY TWO SENSE: OBAMA LAW directive, “Do As I SAY, Not As I Do.” How ever the Left justifies this directive is beyond the powers of logical minds to understand. Socratic Irony is the very description of the Progressive agendas and their responses to opposition. Their contradictory words and actions are Crazy-Making. The Leftard Progressive notion that in order to remove the yoke of societal oppression, society must be oppressed. In other words persecution, abuse, maltreatment, hardship, suffering, misery and repression of the “down trodden,” can only be eliminated through the use of repression, suppression, subjection, subjugation, injustice, tyranny, and despotism toward the rest. Go figure. JUST ME! November 29, 2013ADDENDUM TO DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I DO–IRS IS OBAMA’S THUG CREW Cancer Patient Who Says Obamacare Canceled His Health Insurance Now Says He’s Being Audited by the IRS Nov. 29, 2013 11:31am Madeleine Morgenstern A cancer patient who said publicly that his health coverage was canceled because of Obamacare now says he’s […]duckyack
- THE BLAZE by FRED LUCAS November 27, 2013Valerie Jarrett Targets Hobby Lobby as a ‘Corporate Entity’ Trying to ‘Seize a Controlling Interest’ Over Women’s Health Nov. 27, 2013 4:42pm Fred Lucas White House senior adviser Valerie Jarrett called out Hobby Lobby and insisted the Obamacare mandate case that will go before the Supreme Court is about whether big corporations can restrict women […] […]duckyack
- TEAPARTY.ORG I will air this eveyday until I no longer see people call America a Democracy! (PLEASE STOP PREACHING DEMOCRACY!!! PLEASE FOCUS ON REGAINING OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC!) November 27, 2013THE BIG DIFF by JUST ME NOVEMBER 26, 2013 No true American wants a Democracy for our nation. What we want is our Constitutional Republic. The word “democracy” is nowhere within our Founding Documents-nor did our Founders intend to create a Democracy. What they did intend, and did create, was a Constitutional Republic with democratic […]duckyack
- FOXNEWS.COM Edmund DeMarche and The Associated Press contributed to this report November 27, 2013(THIS IS OBAMA’S CIVILIAN ARMY-JM) Defense Department gives local police equipment designed for a war zone Published November 27, 2013 FoxNews.com March 12: Attendees look at the Lenco MRAP Bear SWAT Team vehicle at the 7th annual From war zones to city streets, some military vehicles are getting a new life — and not everyone […]duckyack
- TEAPARTY.ORG (PLEASE STOP PREACHING DEMOCRACY!!! PLEASE FOCUS ON REGAINING OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC!)) November 26, 2013THE BIG DIFF by JUST ME NOVEMBER 26, 2013 No true American wants a Democracy for our nation. What we want is our Constitutional Republic. The word “democracy” is nowhere within our Founding Documents-nor did our Founders intend to create a Democracy. What they did intend, and did create, was a Constitutional Republic with democratic […]duckyack
- THE BLAZE by BILLY HALLOWELL November 25, 2013Faith Your Eyes Are Fooling You: There Aren’t Two Children in This Photo — and the Family Has a Chilling Explanation Nov. 22, 2013 11:24am Billy Hallowell We will be discussing this story and all the day’s news on our live BlazeCast with Editor-in-Chief Scott Baker (@bakerlink) beginning at 2:15 pm ET: A curious […]duckyack
- THE BLAZE by DAVE URBANSKI (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/11/24/you-might-be-surprised-by-whos-furious-at-msnbc-over-martin-bashirs-sarah-palin-comments/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=story&utm_campaign=ShareButtons) November 25, 2013You Might Be Surprised by Who’s Furious at MSNBC Over Martin Bashir’s Sarah Palin Comments Nov. 24, 2013 6:21pm Dave Urbanski Baltimore Sun TV critic David Zurawik angrily criticized MSNBC and NBC News — along with network stalwarts Tom Brokaw and Chuck Todd — for failing not only to punish host Martin Bashir for comments […]duckyack
- THE BLAZE by BILLY HALLOWELL (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/11/22/the-definition-of-bullying-church-vs-state-threat-leads-another-school-to-drop-student-support-for-operation-christmas-child/) It’s time that people stood up to these bullies and stopped using excuses like, “Rather than use school money to fight a law suit, we decided to back down.” That’s pathetic! Where is the gumption? Where are the parents and community related to schools that kowtow to threats? STOP IT!! If no one stands up for right, then they are supporting the so-called opposition. No excuses, no whining and moaning, and no more dictating! I am furious at the lack of courage so many Americans display at the first sign of trouble. We are facing an evil enemy which will suck everything out of those who accept it and bow down to it. There is no stopping these people because there is nothing that will satiate them! Wake up before you have given away your souls! JUST ME November 22, 2013Education ‘The Definition of Bullying’: Church vs. State Threat Leads Another School to Cut Ties With ‘Operation Christmas Child’ Nov. 22, 2013 9:00am Billy Hallowell Just days after a South Carolina charter school came under fire and subsequently dropped support for Operation Christmas Child, an annual outreach to poor children that is operated by Samarit […]duckyack
- WND December 6, 2013
Site infoSO HERE AND NOW
The Andreas04 Theme.