Wed May 16, 2012, 06:56 PM
FedUp_Queer (975 posts)
Homeland Battlefield Act Portion Found Unconstitutional By New York Judge
Source: Huffington Post
The government had argued that the law did not change the practices of the United States since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. The judge noted in her ruling that the government's inability to assure the plaintiffs that they could not face detention under the law for their work gave them legal standing to challenge the law. Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/16/homeland-battlefield-act-unconstitutional_n_1522587.html What can I say.
|
4 replies, 1794 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
| Author | Time | Post | |
| FedUp_Queer | May 2012 | OP | |
| enough | May 2012 | #1 | |
| awoke_in_2003 | May 2012 | #2 | |
| pinboy3niner | May 2012 | #3 | |
| OnyxCollie | May 2012 | #4 |
Response to FedUp_Queer (Original post)
Wed May 16, 2012, 06:59 PM
enough (6,922 posts)
1. What we can say is thank the past for a few honest judges remaining. (nt)
Response to FedUp_Queer (Original post)
Wed May 16, 2012, 07:54 PM
awoke_in_2003 (18,520 posts)
2. "Homeland Battlefied Act"...
|
"Homeland Security", "Patriot Act", "Operation Enduring Freedom"- whoever coined this crap sure loved the idea of a Ministry of Truth.
|
Response to FedUp_Queer (Original post)
Wed May 16, 2012, 10:21 PM
pinboy3niner (27,561 posts)
3. Judge Blocks Controversial NDAA
|
Wednesday, May 16, 2012 Last Update: 6:49 PM PT By ADAM KLASFELD MANHATTAN (CN) - A federal judge granted a preliminary injunction late Wednesday to block provisions of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act that would allow the military to indefinitely detain anyone it accuses of knowingly or unknowingly supporting terrorism. Signed by President Barack Obama on New Year's Eve, the 565-page NDAA contains a short paragraph, in statute 1021, letting the military detain anyone it suspects "substantially supported" al-Qaida, the Taliban or "associated forces." The indefinite detention would supposedly last until "the end of hostilities." In a 68-page ruling blocking this statute, U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest agreed that the statute failed to "pass constitutional muster" because its broad language could be used to quash political dissent. "There is a strong public interest in protecting rights guaranteed by the First Amendment," Forrest wrote. "There is also a strong public interest in ensuring that due process rights guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment are protected by ensuring that ordinary citizens are able to understand the scope of conduct that could subject them to indefinite military detention." ... http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/05/16/46550.htm |
Response to FedUp_Queer (Original post)
Thu May 17, 2012, 02:21 AM
OnyxCollie (6,573 posts)

