[Peace-discuss] Democrats continue to violate the Bill of Rights

[C. G. Estabrook]

http://news.antiwar.com/2012/11/15/sen-paul-stalls-military-spending-bill-over-summary-detention/

Sen. Paul Filibusters Military Spending Bill Over Summary Detention
Seeks Vote on Amendment to Allow Captured Americans Right to Trial
by Jason Ditz, November 15, 2012

American citizens captured on American soil getting the right to a public jury trial. Not only is the question controversial, but even the idea of bringing up the matter to a vote is sparking anger from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D – NV), who says it is getting in the way of the latest massive military spending bill.

Estimated at roughly two-thirds of a trillion dollars, Sen. Reid sought to push the vote through for a rubber stamping by Thanksgiving, and got a promise from Sens. Carl Levin (D – MI) and John McCain (R – AZ) that “non-germane amendments” wouldn’t even be considered. This has prompted Sen. Rand Paul (R – KY) to filibuster the bill.

That’s because Sen. Paul’s amendment seeks to guarantee that whenever the US military captures American citizens on American soil, they get a real trial. A recent Appeals Court ruling said it was in the “public interest” to allow the military to ignore due process and detain Americans as long as it wants without recourse to a court.

Sen. Reid argues that the bill is “non-germane” and shouldn’t even get a vote. Given the number of hawks in the Senate, even if it does get a vote there’s no guarantee it would pass, but even public debate would be an uncomfortable reminder to Americans that the military can disappear them off the streets at will per last year’s National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).


Appeals Court Restores NDAA’s Indefinite Detention Provisions
An appeals court has rejected a previous judge's ruling that the government be barred from enforcing the NDAA provisions
by John Glaser, October 03, 2012

A federal appeals court of three Obama-appointed judges has rejected a previous ruling barring the government from enforcing the indefinite detention provisions in a recent national defense bill.

Congress passed the National Defense Authorization Act last year, which includes provisions codifying indefinite detention for individuals suspected of allying with or supporting al-Qaeda or its affiliates.

Judge Katherine B. Forrest last month blocked the government from enforcing those particular statutes on grounds that they violate Constitutionally guaranteed rights to due process, in a case brought against the government by journalists and academics including Chris Hedges, Daniel Ellsberg, and Noam Chomsky.

The Obama administration immediately appealed Forrest’s ruling, asking for an “immediate stay,” or suspension of the case’s proceedings. When Forrest denied the request, the government went to the Second US Court of Appeals in Manhattan and asked another judge for an emergency stay, which Judge Raymond J. Lohier granted.

The latest appeals court extended the stay, undermining Judge Forrest’s ruling that the government should be barred from enforcing the law.

“We conclude that the public interest weighs in favor of granting the government’s motion for a stay,” Appeals Court Judges Denny Chin, Raymond Lohier and Christopher Droney wrote in a statement on their ruling.

The appeals court ruled that, since the government has promised that citizens, journalists, and activists are not in danger of being detained as a result of this law, it is unnecessary to block its enforcement.

Both parties in the case have been directed by the court to file reply briefs in the next few months, through to December, after which a new calendar date will be scheduled to argue the case again. So, at least for the next few months, the NDAA’s detention provisions are in effect.

###


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20121116/c46c86bb/attachment.html>