Supreme Court allows NDAA ‘Indefinite detention’ of Americans to stand

The Supreme Court this week, refused to hear an Appeals court decision regarding the NDAA “indefinite detention”. This leaves Obama with the power to pack us up. While we are looking the other way. This should be the headline story today. But then again, we have the Basketball owner’s racism that is much more important. First a refresher.  From  August, 2012 post:  Obama fights injunction against unlawful detention of U.S. citizens

On May 16^th,federal judge Kathleen Forrest granted a preliminary injunction to plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed against Barack Obama and the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA),striking down those sections of the Act that provide the president the power to indefinitely detain American citizens without benefit of their 5^th and 6^th Amendment rights. As a reminder, keep in mind it was Obama that insisted that the language in the NDAA bill include Citizens: Obama lies-he insisted that detention of Americans be in defense bill

“But… It was his administration that insisted that the language be included in the bill”.

From the video: Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) told Congress recently that under the original wording of the National Defense Authorization Act, American citizens were excluded from the provision that allowed for detention. Once Obama’s officials saw the text though, says Levin, “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

Under the terms of the Act,Obama had been given exclusive authority to direct members of the US military to arrest and imprison anyone he believed to have “substantially supported” al Qaeda,the Taliban,or “associated forces.” When pressed by plaintiff’s attorneys about the practical extent of this authority,government lawyers admitted …the NDAA does give the president the power to lock up people like journalist Chris Hedges and peaceful activists,” admitting that “…even war correspondents could be locked up indefinitely under the NDAA.”

Yet incredibly,when pressed on the issue,this Obama mouthpiece suggested to Judge Forrest that concerns about the president’s detention powers were excessive as American citizens would,after all,have the ability to file a writ of habeas corpus should they be illegally or improperly jailed! “How long does [such a] petition take,” asked Forrest? When Torrance refused to answer,the Judge continued,“Several years,right”?

You might want to check out FBI Director “I have to check and see if Obama can kill Citizens on U.S. soil

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday said he would have to go back and check with the Department of Justice whether Attorney General Eric Holder’s “three criteria” for the targeted killing of Americans also applied to Americans inside the U.S.

Now back to the update:

A decision by the U.S. Supreme Court means the federal government now has an open door to “detain as a threat to national security anyone viewed as a troublemaker,” according to critics.

The high court this week refused to review an appeals court decision that said the president and U.S. military can arrest and indefinitely detain individuals.

The controversial provision authorizes the military, under presidential authority, to arrest, kidnap, detain without trial and hold indefinitely American citizens thought to “represent an enduring security threat to the United States.”

At the trial court, on Sept. 12, 2012, U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest of the Southern District Court of New York ruled in favor of the plaintiffs and placed a permanent injunction on the indefinite detention provision.

Obama then appealed, and the 2nd Circuit authorized the government detention program.

Since the law passed, multiple states have passed laws banning its enforcement. Herb Titus, a constitutional expert, previously told WND Forrest’s ruling underscored “the arrogance of the current regime, in that they will not answer questions that they ought to answer to a judge because they don’t think they have to.”

The judge explained that the plaintiffs alleged paragraph 1021 is “constitutionally infirm, violating both their free speech and associational rights guaranteed by the 1st Amendment as well due process rights guaranteed by the 5th Amendment.”

From: Supreme Court green lights detention of Americans  Read more at WND