Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Senator Al Franken: Why I Voted Against the National Defense Authorization Act [View all]ProSense
(116,464 posts)103. Wait
Section 1031, paragraph (e) which you referenced first was the language Feinstein added. It does NOT grant an exemption to US citizens. What it means is that IF (very big IF) the USSC decides the indefinite detention of US citizens in Guantanamo is unconstitutional, this law doesn't change that (which it couldn't anyway because acts of congress don't trump the Constitution). Well guess what? The USSC hasn't decided that question and may never, or if they do with the current court makeup are almost certainly going to favor the side of fascism. Padilla was only moved to a civilian court because of public pressure. No court ruling mandated that he be moved. So if "existing law" didn't protect Padilla, what makes you think it will protect you, me, or any other citizen? 1031(e) is a meaningless paragraph filled with empty words.
...you want me to read it more closely to find your hypothetical?
Ludicrous.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
114 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Senator Al Franken: Why I Voted Against the National Defense Authorization Act [View all]
kpete
Dec 2011
OP
I found this post at wariscrime.org explains the issues with NDAA very well
justiceischeap
Dec 2011
#62
You know what govt lawyers do with a loophole when alone can't be printed on the internetz
kenny blankenship
Dec 2011
#109
Uh, actually it can be proven that this bill will authorize the detention of
truedelphi
Dec 2011
#21
Did you support Bush's policies on the president having the power to name anyone an 'enemy combatant
sabrina 1
Dec 2011
#41
so you must have been fine with the Patriot Act, because it only mentions terrorists
StarsInHerHair
Dec 2011
#43
The point is, that there is no reason to have any clauses related to indefinite detention...
blackspade
Dec 2011
#88
He voted for the Feinstein amendment, I was confused because he voted for S. 1867 on Dec 1
jakeXT
Dec 2011
#10
That was on the Senate bill earlier this month. He voted "no" on the conference bill today
karynnj
Dec 2011
#14
And the difference between the two versions is that the conference bill moves the
patrice
Dec 2011
#17
I listened to him on Air America for a couple of years. Someone tell me just how Liberal he is,
patrice
Dec 2011
#18
Not very. I'd call him a moderate but for a US Senator, he is pretty far left.
TheKentuckian
Dec 2011
#84
Which color is Franken on this graph? How many millionaires directly create our laws?
patrice
Dec 2011
#20
In other words, only reliable Democrats and the looneyest of the looneytarian Senators
Major Nikon
Dec 2011
#53
Since my 2 Senators both voted against this bill, I can guarantee you that nothing is wrong with it.
Major Hogwash
Dec 2011
#56