Is is stupidity or arrogance: Obama regime argues the need to reinstate NDAA claiming lackof due process against their law, which will allow indefinite incarceration without due process
Posted on | September 18, 2012 | 9 Comments
NDAA REINSTATED!
|
Inbox
|
x | |||
|
9:29 PM (27 minutes ago)
|
|||
|
||||
MORE BAD, BAD NEWS!
Patti
Tuesday, September 18, 2012
Federal Judge Reinstates Unconstitutional NDAA
Opponents of NDAA Law:
“This pernicious law poses one of the greatest threats to civil liberties in our nation’s history”
Kurt Nimmo Infowars.com September 18, 2012
Federal judge Raymond Lohier.
Late Monday night a federal judge in New York, Raymond Lohier, granted the Obama administration an “emergency” stay that temporarily blocks a ruling by U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest last week blocking the NDAA.
“Lohier offered no explanation or rationale for the temporary stay. However, the Justice Department has asked the appeals court to block the injunction,” Politico reported late last night.
The Obama administration characterized the ruling by Forrest as unconstitutional.
The Justice Department said the ruling was “unprecedented” and argued that the executive has the right under the Constitution to detain anyone indefinitely without due process. The Fifth Amendment specifically mentions due process of law.
The NDAA also violates the “equal protection” clause of the 14th Amendment stating that all people be treated the same under the law.
The federal government argues that the National Defense Authorization Act did not expand its authority beyond what already existed under the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) , as interpreted by judges in Guantánamo Bay habeas corpus cases.
“This pernicious law poses one of the greatest threats to civil liberties in our nation’s history,” writes Brian J. Trautman. Under AUMF, “this law can be used by authorities to detain (forever) anyone the government considers a threat to national security and stability – potentially even demonstrators and protesters exercising their First Amendment rights.”
Documents produced
Category: Uncategorized
Comments
9 Responses to “Is is stupidity or arrogance: Obama regime argues the need to reinstate NDAA claiming lackof due process against their law, which will allow indefinite incarceration without due process”
Leave a Reply












29839 Sta Margarita Pkwy, 
Videography by Barbara Rosenfeld 

September 19th, 2012 @ 6:21 am
They should be aware that if reinstated they do not get ” DUE PROCESS”, that is what they ar trying to take away from the AMERICAN.
It has com back to bite them.
September 19th, 2012 @ 6:22 am
They should be aware that if reinstated they do not get ” DUE PROCESS”, that is what they are trying to take away from the AMERICAN.
It has com back to bite them.
September 19th, 2012 @ 6:22 am
They should be aware that if reinstated they do not get ” DUE PROCESS”, that is what they are trying to take away from the AMERICAN.
It has com back to bite them.
September 19th, 2012 @ 6:22 am
They should be aware that if reinstated they do not get ” DUE PROCESS”, that is what they are trying to take away from the AMERICAN.
It has com back to bite them.
September 19th, 2012 @ 6:25 am
sorry about the duplications the “POSTING” repeated itself.
September 19th, 2012 @ 9:03 am
This is wild. Several months ago, I tried to get Senator Grassley’s office, locally, and in D.C. to give me an update on NDAA, and they wouldn’t cooperate!
September 19th, 2012 @ 9:06 am
And here’s the real wild part: many conservatives voted for this, like Grassley…but liberal Tom Harkin voted against the entire bill…!! Geez-us…what’s up with that?
September 19th, 2012 @ 12:38 pm
We have 100 million people in this country that own hundreds of millions of firearms, not to mention our military. If this mutt in OUR white house thinks he can imprison and kill American citizens at his will, he’s got another thing coming to him. That would be a noose!
For most peoples information Barry(what ever his name is)was never a professor in Chicago. He was a visiting non tenured lecturer that was not very well liked, or respected because of his arrogant attitude. Same as he is now.
September 20th, 2012 @ 12:04 am
Also: the ACLU got involved with this dissent and they were (AGAINST) this law, too! Now, what are the odds?