Below, the US Government's response to Federal Judge Katherine Forrest's recent ruling placing a preliminary injunction of section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act FY2012 (PDF).
The NDAA is a federal law enacted annually that specifies budget and expenditures for the US Department of Defense.
Section 1021's is a far reaching expansion of the AUMF, Authorization for the Use of Military Force (PDF), and contains language so vague that it permits the US Government to indefinitely detain individuals it deems as a threat anywhere in the world, including journalists and activists, violating the First and Fifth amendments of the US Constitution.
I would like to make note of Andy Worthington, Guantanamo historian and author's, most recent post entitled "US Judge Rules Against Military Detention of US Terror Suspects - But What About the Foreigners in Guantánamo?" In particular:
"However, it is, above all, a disgrace that foreigners are being ignored by those campaigning against the indefinite military detention of US terror suspects -- or those seized in the US -- because the principles of detention are the same whether you are an American or not. Until the "war on terror," there were only two ways of depriving someone of their liberty -- either they were criminal suspects, who would be tried, promptly, in federal court, or they were prisoners of war, to be held humanely until the duration of hostilities, and protected, under Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, from "violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture," and from "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment."
I wholeheartedly agree.
This work by Alexa O'Brien is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at [email protected].