SHOULD PRESIDENT OBAMA CHOOSE TO LOCK YOU UP TOMORROW AND THROW AWAY THE KEY HE ALREADY HAS THAT RIGHT UNDER THE NDAA ACT. YES, CONGRESS GAVE HIM THAT RIGHT. IS IT CONSTITUTIONAL? IT SEEMS THESE DAYS CONGRESS CAN AND WILL PASS ANY LAW IT WISHES KNOWING THAT IN MOST CASES IT TAKES YEARS FOR THAT LAW TO BE CHALLENGED AND BROUGHT BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT. DO YOU REALLY THINK MAYOR BLOOMBERG'S DECISION ON BIG GULPS WAS CONSTITUTIONAL? I DOUBT EVEN HE BELIEVES THAT, BUT AT THE SAME TIME NEW YORKERS ARE STUCK WITH IT UNTIL A HIGH COURT RULES ON IT. POLITICIANS ARE RUNNING AMUCK, KNOWING THAT CONSTITUTIONAL RESTRAINTS ARE FAR REMOVED FROM UNLAWFUL ACTS.
STOP OBAMA! Stop Obama's Second Term Agenda WIDGET. FOLLOW LINK FOR DETAILS.
I don't think this is correct. If you are referring to Section 1021 under Subtitle D-Counterterrorism, the only persons it applies to are:
ReplyDelete"(b) COVERED PERSONS.—A covered person under this section
is any person as follows:
(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.
(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners,
including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.
I don't have a problem with that. The next section, 1022, specifically excludes U.S. citizens:
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.