Huffington Post admits NDAA permits indefinite detention

Based upon recent history, I'm concerned that the conservative Supreme Court will once again bury its collective head in the sand and ignore this clear violation of the Constitution.

don't worry i sure A.G. eric holder will take this to the supreme court .

same case in 1803 the supreme court ASSUMED the power to deside if a law is constitutional or not . key word ASSUMED . that is no where in the constitution . WE THE PEOPLE deside if something is constitutional !

Odd that this hasn't made the news....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CmCnl6Epig

i like it but did someone forget to tell them obama is in hawaii . does anyone know if he sighed it with the unconstitutional auto pen ?

I don't mind protesters anywhere anymore, it seems to be one of the few ways to get this Gov. to act, hopefully it will hasten the S.C. to act, they may or may not do the right thing but it is the only thing left.

mason coal burner wrote:supreme court ruling 1803 marberry v. madison any law that is unconstitional is not a law . this law is a violation of the 6th amendment . its unconstitutional

The fact is our Constitution is NOT being respected by the powers that be make the FACT that so many laws are unconstitutional almost irrelevant in the real world. You have to ask yourself why so few in government stand up for the Bill of Rights and abide by the limitations put on the Federal government when it was founded. "Free" speech is no longer a right by law. Anyone who dares to speak out is at risk of imprisonment without trial. In other words, keep your heads down, shut up, and do what you are told.

jpete wrote:Odd that this hasn't made the news....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CmCnl6Epig

This video is gone.

Chris Hedges challenge the NDAA in court. This is a brief interview of one of the lawyers on the case.

It appears that in two to three weeks we may at least know what a lower court feels with regard to the NDAA. i wonder how long this will linger in the lower courts before it finally makes its way to the Supreme Court?

Sounds like the Court which heard this case upheld The Constitution. In my opinion is very likely the Executive Branch will appeal the decision so it aint over.

Oh yeah, the old "it appears & seems like" theories surely do run rampant.

"U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest, in a 68-page opinion, ruled Wednesday that Section 1021 of the NDAA was unconstitutional. It was a stunning and monumental victory. With her ruling she returned us to a country where—as it was before Obama signed this act into law Dec. 31—the government cannot strip a U.S. citizen of due process or use the military to arrest him or her and then hold him or her in military prison indefinitely."

"The government has 60 days to appeal. It can also, as Mayer and Afran have urged, accept the injunction that nullifies the law. If the government appeals, the case will go to a federal appellate court. The ruling, even if an appellate court upholds it, could be vanquished in the Supreme Court, especially given the composition of that court."

Source of quotes: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/a_v ... _20120518/

UPDATE: "Posted: 09/18/2012 12:21 pm EDT Updated: 09/18/2012 1:14 pm EDT"

"WASHINGTON -- A federal appeals judge gave the Obama administration the OK to keep enforcing its indefinite detention policy Tuesday, issuing a temporary stay of a ruling that had found the practice unconstitutional.

The stay, issued by Judge Raymond Lohier of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, lasts until Sept. 28, when a three-judge appellate panel will hear the case."

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/1 ... 93652.html

Somehow I just knew that would happen.