USA: A Federal Appeals Court Ruled In Favor Of President Obama's Appeal To Maintain Indefinite Detention Provision In The NDAA Law!

The Examiner

Federal court rules in favor of NDAA

written by Ryan Keller

October 3, 2012

A federal appeals court ruled in favor of the Obama administration on Tuesday, extending a temporary emergency extension of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that was implemented by New York federal judge Raymond Lohier last month after an injunction was issued to hold the act by Judge Katherine B. Forrest.

The act gives the president the authority to indefinitely detain anyone in the world, including American citizens, without due process, for suspicion of supporting al Qaeda or other terrorist groups.

Tuesday’s decision was reached by a U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit motion panel comprised of three judges: Denny Chin, Raymond Lohier and Christopher Droney, all of whom were appointed by President Obama.

The judges wrote in a three page report, “We conclude that the public interest weighs in favor of granting the government's motion for a stay.”

The report continued:

“First, in its memorandum of law in support of its motion, the government clarifies unequivocally that, 'based on their stated activities,' plaintiffs, 'journalists and activists[,] . . . are in no danger whatsoever of ever being captured and detained by the U.S. military.'

Second, on its face, the statute does not affect the existing rights of United States citizens or other individuals arrested in the United States. See NDAA § 1021(e) ('Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.').

Third, the language of the district court's injunction appears to go beyond NDAA § 1021 itself and to limit the government's authority under the Authorization for Use of Military Force...

The NDAA was brought to court by a group of activists and journalist who raised concern that the government could target journalists for their opinions.

Last month, Lohier issued a temporary extension of the act after the Obama administration appealed Judge Forrest’s injunction. Forrest declared that the act could have a “chilling effect” on free speech, noting that it appears to give the president

“necessary force against anyone he deems involved in activities supporting enemy combatants, and therefore criminal laws and due process are suspended for any acts falling within the broad purview of what might constitute “substantially” or “directly supporting” terrorist organizations. If this is what Congress in fact intended, no doubt it goes too far.

President Obama issued a signing statement before signing the act into law stating that he wouldn’t use it on American citizens; however, it was the Obama administration that sought to have the very power to use the law on Americans added to the NDAA.

During a speech this past December, NDAA co-sponsor Senator Carl Levin (D., Michigan) explained that the act originally contained language that would prevent the use of the law on Americans, but Obama demanded that it be taken out.

“The language which precluded the application of Section 1031 to American citizens was in the bill that we originally approved…and the administration asked us to remove the language which says that U.S. citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.

It was the administration that asked us to remove the very language which we had in the bill which passed the committee…we removed it at the request of the administration. It was the administration which asked us to remove the very language the absence of which is now objected to.

Even though the NDAA authorizes the president to detain people for supporting terrorist organizations, the U.S. government continues to support known al Qaeda terrorists in the Middle East.