General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsActivists sue Obama, others over National Defense Authorization Act
Last edited Wed Apr 18, 2012, 04:54 PM - Edit history (1)
A coalition of well-known journalists, activists and civil libertarians have sued President Obama, Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr., Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and other members of the U.S. government to push them to remove or rewrite this years defense appropriations bill, saying it chills speech by threatening constitutionally protected activities such as news reporting, protest and political organizing in defense of controversial causes such as the Wikileaks case.
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit, which was launched by former New York Times foreign correspondent Chris Hedges, claim that the new provisions, which went into effect on March 1, not only put them at risk of arrest but also allows indefinite detentions of U.S. citizens on U.S. soil, and that the provisions are too vague.
Environmentalists have also registered their opposition. In light of many prosecutions of U.S. environmental activists under ramped-up terror laws in the past six years, many fear the new law will be used against them.
My activities as a civil liberties, democracy advocate and independent journalist definitely leave me under the purview of the vague language of the NDAA [National Defense Authorization Act], says Jennifer Tangerine Bolen, one of seven current plaintiffs, along with Hedges, in the suit. A host of live panel discussions with what she calls activists and revolutionaries as part of independent media outlet Revolution Truth, Bolen has had ongoing contact with Wikileaks activists in an effort to get information to the public.
Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/environment/la-me-gs-activists-sue-obama-over-new-terror-laws-20120417,0,1036357.story
tosh
(4,423 posts)teddy51
(3,491 posts)I still can't believe that Obama went along with the NDAA bill.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Guess what the criticism of choice will be for this lawsuit?
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)I he had, out of hand, rejected/repealed all of Smirk's fascist initiatives, he would only have to defend his right flank. As it is, he's made himself vulnerable to attacks from the left as well. Very sad.