U.S. Asks Judge to Undo Ruling Against Military Detention Law
Source: Reuters
U.S. asks judge to undo ruling against military detention law
NEW YORK | Fri May 25, 2012 8:54pm EDT
By Basil Katz
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Federal prosecutors on Friday urged a judge to lift her order barring enforcement of part of a new law that permits indefinite military detention, a measure critics including a prize-winning journalist say is too vague and threatens free speech.
Manhattan federal court Judge Katherine Forrest this month ruled in favor of activists and reporters who said they feared being detained under a section of the law, signed by President Barack Obama in December.
The government says indefinite military detention without trial is justified in some cases involving militants and their supporters.
But critics worry that the law is unclear and gives the Executive Branch sole discretion to decide who and what type of activities can be considered as supporting militants.
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE84P01H20120526?irpc=932
Solly Mack
(90,799 posts)enough
(13,268 posts)How 'bout we go through the legal process. You don't like it, you appeal it.
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Post removed
Marblehead
(1,268 posts)uphold the constitution now can we....
christx30
(6,241 posts)Are superhuman beings, impervious to gunfire. Of COURSE we need special laws to combat them. We need the legal ability to make people vanish without a trace, never to be heard from again.
villager
(26,001 posts)n/t
midnight
(26,624 posts)pmorlan1
(2,096 posts)I hope the judge sticks to her original ruling.
JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)Obama claimed he was considering a veto because of the 2012 NDAA's sections 1021 and 1022. Unfortunately, the Congress passed it overwhelmingly (many Democrats voting against, including my own representative).
The provisions are outrageously unconstitutional on their face. So the judge has ruled. She gave an opening to the administration to let the ruling stand. No political or legal force can be cited that is making the administration contest the ruling. This is an administration choice. It is wrong. It is outrageous.