Federal court enjoins NDAA, page 1

Federal court enjoins NDAA

www.salon.com

A federal district judge today, the newly-appointed Katherine Forrest of the Southern District of New York, issued an amazing ruling: one which preliminarily enjoins enforcement of the highly controversial indefinite provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act............
The ruling was a sweeping victory for the plaintiffs, as it rejected each of the Obama DOJ’s three arguments

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.infowars.com

Chris Hedges is a true American hero.. Bringing a case against the Feds is never easy... Bringing one on a new basis which stems from his fear of being arrested and the influence that has on his reporting... is novel.. His courage is a beacon for us all.. Note that Obama, who was against this, sent his attack dogs from Justice to fight the ruling... I guess he wasn't that much against it..

www.salon.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

I read this earlier here.

Of course, it says she only shot down the Indefinite Detention part of the NDAA.

I'm really proud of the Federal court for ruling in the citizens' favor on this.

reply to post by Asktheanimals

---

thank GOD!!!!


That was some relief for now!!But I greatly believe it will be overturned.

Originally posted by R_Clark


Chris Hedges is a true American hero.. Bringing a case against the Feds is never easy... Bringing one on a new basis which stems from his fear of being arrested and the influence that has on his reporting... is novel.. His courage is a beacon for us all.. Note that Obama, who was against this, sent his attack dogs from Justice to fight the ruling... I guess he wasn't that much against it..

www.salon.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

A genuine ray of hope. Does this have to be challenged state by state?

reply to post by AuranVector

---

I believe it was federal court... next stop the Appeals court... but it looks good... the judge enjoined it... so it forces Justice to prove their side..

reply to post by Skewed

---

We need to celebrate even the littlest of victories or we'd have nothing to celebrate at all.

reply to post by Asktheanimals

---

Point taken.

rt.com...

The judge’s ruling comes, coincidentally, at the same time that the US House Armed Services Committee has passed next year’s National Defense Authorization Act. Congress is expected to begin voting on amendments for next year’s NDAA as early as this this week, but during Wednesday’s opening debates it was revealed that indefinite detention is already included once again in the bill.

Well, that didn't take long. I'm not really happy to hear this at all, because, although they said that "indefinite detention of those in the US is wrong" they can still, even under this ruling, take unnamed civilians and "militants" from other countries and indefinitely detain them.

reply to post by Anonymous404

---

It also protects you trolls.... so give us a star or two, eh?

Originally posted by R_Clark
reply to post by Anonymous404

---

It also protects you trolls.... so give us a star or two, eh?

What? I already starred and flagged your post. Just because I didn't tell you doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Are you begging for stars now?

reply to post by ludwigvonmises003

---

Even if it gets over turned, when it makes it to the Supreme Court, it will get rejected. I can not see anyone of them willing agree to that bill when it is clearly Unconstitutional. Right now, all of the justices are in the history books and have the best job in the world; I would be everything that they do not want to go down in history in a negative light.

At least here in America, if someone we know is detained indefinately without trial, we will have to count on our friends and family members to get the case to the supreme court. It may be expensive, but a $2 donation from everyone against the law will more than cover the bill.

It would seem that we just can't win when it comes to this. A proposed bill to keep indefinite detention out of NEXT year's NDAA fails in the US House.
rt.com...

Even after a federal court deemed the NDAA unconstitutional, the US House of Representatives refused to exclude indefinite detention provisions from the infamous defense spending bill during a vote on Friday.

An attempt to strike down any provisions allowing for the US military to indefinitely detain American citizens without charge from next year’s National Defense Authorization Act was shot down Friday morning in the House of Representatives.

HuffPost explained that Representatives Smith and Amash believed...

that letting the president decide to detain anyone -- including Americans -- deemed to be a terrorist was granting the executive too much power. And they argued that with more than 400 terrorists having been tried and convicted in civilian courts while dozens of plots were prevented, the law was unnecessary.

Representative Smith goes on to say that

"The president right now has the authority to go outside the normal due process, constitutionally protected rights that are part of a court trial, and lock somebody up indefinitely or place them in military custody here in the U.S."

This is a HUGE step back.

I hope that, with having shot that portion of the Act down once, We The People can do it again.

Originally posted by R_Clark


Chris Hedges is a true American hero.. Bringing a case against the Feds is never easy... Bringing one on a new basis which stems from his fear of being arrested and the influence that has on his reporting... is novel.. His courage is a beacon for us all.. Note that Obama, who was against this, sent his attack dogs from Justice to fight the ruling... I guess he wasn't that much against it..

www.salon.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

I just love it :-)

By issuing a preliminary injunction, the judge prevents the U.S. government from enforcing section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act's "Homeland Battlefield" provisions.

www.reuters.com...

there - done

Obama was against it - I'm sure he fought tooth and nail... :-)

He did sign off on the whole thing after all - including his signing statement

just his dumb luck this case came before Forrest I guess

“It was really unusual for a judge to declare unconstitutional a major provision of an act of Congress. I can’t remember the last time that ever happened,” said Carl Mayer, co-counsel for the plaintiffs. “The judge recognized that, but felt it was necessary to protect our constitution and to protect our democracy. There’s a lot of activists who understand how serious this is, but it’s less well known to the general public.”

www.latimes.com...
I mean - he did nominate her for this position - he must be kicking himself :-)

There were more than a few visible people behind all this - not just Hedges - so there's more than just the one hero

maybe some of the heroes are very cleverly camouflaged

it's not done, I know - but I am really enjoying this for right now

Israel angered over IAEA vote on nuclear arsenal
  Posted 13 days ago with 79 member flags

Neil Armstrong dead at age 82 - report
  Posted 17 days ago with 63 member flags

Judge orders release of detained Marine veteran
  Posted 19 days ago with 58 member flags

Birds hold \'funerals\' for dead
  Posted 10 days ago with 55 member flags

Russia announces enormous finds of radioactive waste and nuclear reactors in Arctic seas
  Posted 12 days ago with 49 member flags

TSA agents swarm Ron Paul\'s plane, demand explosives check
  Posted 11 days ago with 47 member flags

Mysterious Changes in Ocean Salt Spur NASA Expedition
  Posted 1 days ago with 36 member flags

Ga. Murder Case Uncovers Terror Plot by Soldiers
  Posted 15 days ago with 32 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: