Tincan Joey Wrote:
Nov 27, 2012 9:02 PM
And a federal judge from the US District court blocked the NDAA provision for just this reason: www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/12834-federal-judge-permanently-blocks-indefinite-detention-under-ndaa Judge Forrest disagreed with the federal government’s argument that the relevant provisions of the NDAA merely restate existing law. She wrote: “Section 1021 is not merely an ‘affirmation’ of the AUMF [Authorization for the Use of Military Force].” Pointing out that were Section 1021 and the AUMF identical then the former would be redundant, Judge Forrest held: