SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Civil Liberties Victory: Judge Halts Indefinite Detention Law
Judge: "First Amendment rights are guaranteed by the Constitution and cannot be legislated away"
Sep 13, 2012
A federal judge struck down a law that allows indefinite detention as a provision of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) on Wednesday.
As Democracy Now! summarizes the ruling,
Judge Katherine Forrest issued a preliminary injunction against the provision in the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, earlier this year. On Wednesday, Judge Forrest made her ruling permanent, declaring that the NDAA cannot be used to hold people in indefinite military detention on suspicion of having "substantially supported" al-Qaeda or its allies. The decision marked a major victory for the group of journalists, scholars and political activists who had brought the case, arguing the provision was so broad it could easily infringe on freedom of speech.
" First Amendment rights are guaranteed by the Constitution and cannot be legislated away," Forrest wrote in the ruling. "This Court rejects the Government's suggestion that American citizens can be placed in military detention indefinitely, for acts they could not predict might subject them to detention."
"In short, the Court can find no authority in domestic law or the law of war, nor can the government point to any, to justify the concept of 'support' as a valid ground for detention," Forrest wrote.
Shahid Buttar, executive director of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, praised the ruling and stated that "Judge Forrest's decision enjoining the NDAA's detention provisions is a rare example of our system of checks & balances actually working. Other courts should heed this important example and, like Judge Forrest, do their jobs and closely scrutinize overreaching laws and executive abuses to defend constitutional rights."
The lawsuit had been brought by seven plaintiffs -- Chris Hedges, Dan Ellsberg, Noam Chomsky, Birgitta Jonsdottir, Alexa O'Brien, Kai Wargall, and Jennifer Bolen -- alleging that the NDAA violates "both their free speech and associational rights guaranteed by the First Amendment as well as due process rights guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution."
Hedges spoke with The Village Voice about the new ruling and said he was "elated."
"I'm elated," he told the Voice. "This judge is amazing. She had the courage to do the right thing in an age when most judges write long opinions about why they can't do the right thing."
"If they appeal, we'll fight them, and we'll keep fighting them, and we'll fight them until we win," said Hedges.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
A federal judge struck down a law that allows indefinite detention as a provision of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) on Wednesday.
As Democracy Now! summarizes the ruling,
Judge Katherine Forrest issued a preliminary injunction against the provision in the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, earlier this year. On Wednesday, Judge Forrest made her ruling permanent, declaring that the NDAA cannot be used to hold people in indefinite military detention on suspicion of having "substantially supported" al-Qaeda or its allies. The decision marked a major victory for the group of journalists, scholars and political activists who had brought the case, arguing the provision was so broad it could easily infringe on freedom of speech.
" First Amendment rights are guaranteed by the Constitution and cannot be legislated away," Forrest wrote in the ruling. "This Court rejects the Government's suggestion that American citizens can be placed in military detention indefinitely, for acts they could not predict might subject them to detention."
"In short, the Court can find no authority in domestic law or the law of war, nor can the government point to any, to justify the concept of 'support' as a valid ground for detention," Forrest wrote.
Shahid Buttar, executive director of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, praised the ruling and stated that "Judge Forrest's decision enjoining the NDAA's detention provisions is a rare example of our system of checks & balances actually working. Other courts should heed this important example and, like Judge Forrest, do their jobs and closely scrutinize overreaching laws and executive abuses to defend constitutional rights."
The lawsuit had been brought by seven plaintiffs -- Chris Hedges, Dan Ellsberg, Noam Chomsky, Birgitta Jonsdottir, Alexa O'Brien, Kai Wargall, and Jennifer Bolen -- alleging that the NDAA violates "both their free speech and associational rights guaranteed by the First Amendment as well as due process rights guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution."
Hedges spoke with The Village Voice about the new ruling and said he was "elated."
"I'm elated," he told the Voice. "This judge is amazing. She had the courage to do the right thing in an age when most judges write long opinions about why they can't do the right thing."
"If they appeal, we'll fight them, and we'll keep fighting them, and we'll fight them until we win," said Hedges.
A federal judge struck down a law that allows indefinite detention as a provision of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) on Wednesday.
As Democracy Now! summarizes the ruling,
Judge Katherine Forrest issued a preliminary injunction against the provision in the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, earlier this year. On Wednesday, Judge Forrest made her ruling permanent, declaring that the NDAA cannot be used to hold people in indefinite military detention on suspicion of having "substantially supported" al-Qaeda or its allies. The decision marked a major victory for the group of journalists, scholars and political activists who had brought the case, arguing the provision was so broad it could easily infringe on freedom of speech.
" First Amendment rights are guaranteed by the Constitution and cannot be legislated away," Forrest wrote in the ruling. "This Court rejects the Government's suggestion that American citizens can be placed in military detention indefinitely, for acts they could not predict might subject them to detention."
"In short, the Court can find no authority in domestic law or the law of war, nor can the government point to any, to justify the concept of 'support' as a valid ground for detention," Forrest wrote.
Shahid Buttar, executive director of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, praised the ruling and stated that "Judge Forrest's decision enjoining the NDAA's detention provisions is a rare example of our system of checks & balances actually working. Other courts should heed this important example and, like Judge Forrest, do their jobs and closely scrutinize overreaching laws and executive abuses to defend constitutional rights."
The lawsuit had been brought by seven plaintiffs -- Chris Hedges, Dan Ellsberg, Noam Chomsky, Birgitta Jonsdottir, Alexa O'Brien, Kai Wargall, and Jennifer Bolen -- alleging that the NDAA violates "both their free speech and associational rights guaranteed by the First Amendment as well as due process rights guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution."
Hedges spoke with The Village Voice about the new ruling and said he was "elated."
"I'm elated," he told the Voice. "This judge is amazing. She had the courage to do the right thing in an age when most judges write long opinions about why they can't do the right thing."
"If they appeal, we'll fight them, and we'll keep fighting them, and we'll fight them until we win," said Hedges.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy