Judge Upholds Ban on NDAA Detentions

Originally posted by QQXXw
reply to post by kn0wh0w

 

The constitution is outdated and it is not worth clinging to it anymore. How would you like it if we judged you by medieval law? of course you would not like it.

people like you need to be put in an institution. Though I do think it needs to be modernized and have all of our rights written out in excruciating detail so that they will stop trying to circumvent our laws.

reply to post by burntheships


I was impressed by this part;

The ruling was a sweeping victory for the plaintiffs, as it rejected each of the Obama DOJ’s three arguments: (1) because none of the plaintiffs has yet been indefinitely detained, they lack “standing” to challenge the statute; (2) even if they have standing, the lack of imminent enforcement against them renders injunctive relief unnecessary; and (3) the NDAA creates no new detention powers beyond what the 2001 AUMF already provides.

As for the DOJ’s first argument — lack of standing — the court found that the plaintiffs are already suffering substantial injury from the reasonable fear that they could be indefinitely detained under section 1021 of the NDAA as a result of their constitutionally protected activities. As the court explained (h/t Charles Michael):

In support of their motion, Plaintiffs assert that § 1021 already has impacted their associational and expressive activities–and would continue to impact them, and that § 1021 is vague to such an extent that it provokes fear that certain of their associational and expressive activities could subject them to indefinite or prolonged military detention.

this is huge:

The court found that the plaintiffs have “shown an actual fear that their expressive and associational activities” could subject them to indefinite detention under the law,and “each of them has put forward uncontroverted evidence of concrete — non-hypothetical — ways in which the presence of the legislation has already impacted those expressive and associational activities”

I wonder if the Obama Campaign will use the lack of “standing” tactic to "scare" people that might show signs of voting for Romney !!

reply to post by QQXXw

The constitution is outdated and it is not worth clinging to it anymore. How would you like it if we judged you by medieval law? of course you would not like it.

No Comment.


I wonder which active constitution is the oldest in the world.

The day the Constitution can be outdated is the same day when the corrupting influences of men no longer exist.
And if history is any indicator, I would say that would be never.

Originally posted by QQXXw
reply to post by kn0wh0w

 

The constitution is outdated and it is not worth clinging to it anymore. How would you like it if we judged you by medieval law? of course you would not like it.

Originally posted by QQXXw
reply to post by kn0wh0w

 

The constitution is outdated and it is not worth clinging to it anymore. How would you like it if we judged you by medieval law? of course you would not like it.

Common sense is for the ages.

Originally posted by Destinyone
reply to post by burntheships

 

Kudos to her....taking back America inch by inch....

Des

True, but I wish they weren't stealing it acre by acre.

It seems that every time something like this happens and I start to have a little hope some fascist in Washington comes up with something even worse. I'm exhausted from the emotional rollercoaster.

Originally posted by xuenchen
reply to post by burntheships

 

I wonder if the Obama Campaign will use the lack of “standing” tactic to "scare" people that might show signs of voting for Romney !!

It seems that this is the tactic that the Obama administration has taken on!

Throwing their weight around, like wrestlers!

ETA : Jesse Ventura take note!

In her initial ruling, Forest had accepted the arguments from a number of political dissidents, including Noam Chomsky and Daniel Ellsberg, that they had a reasonable fear that they could be disappeared off the street and held in military custody for constitutionally protected political speech. The Administration did not argue that they wouldn’t be detained, but insisted that since they hadn’t been detained yet they had no standing to contest the law.

Yet, wow. Because you haven't been detained Yet, you shouldn't be complaining about the law. *rolls eyes* how arrogant.
I really hope more people start becoming aware of whats going on and start uniting together. realize that your governments have been causing fear and hate amongst us to divide us because they know that if we were united together we would take our power back

It's good to see we still have some checks left to ballance the system.

The disturbing part though is how the Obama administration was fighting to keep that in. He really wants to have that power. That's scary. After a move like that, I find it unbelievable anyone in thier right mind would still support him. He should be impeached and stand trial for treason! Yet more than likely he will be re-elected to have 4 more years to set up his socialistic police state. And this time he wont have to hold back to look good for elections.

Its good to see there are some legit judges left, but if they want to get this enforced they will just bypass her with an appeal to a higher court that they have in their pocket

reply to post by QQXXw


So please, feel free to move to where there is no Constitution to protect you, and don't let the Declaration hit you in the butt on the way out!

reply to post by QQXXw


300 some odd years ago is medieval? I hope they lock you up indefinitely.

If in the past 10 1/2 years the laws that were always there and the ones that were enacted kept America safe, why now new ones? You would think NDAA would have been enacted in 2002-2004 or so... why 2012? My guess is that 2012 was the perfect time, not too soon and not too late. Any sooner and people would have woke up, any later and people would say WTF? Yet we all said WTF and would have said WTF regardless. They just tried to slide it in under a decade of war and terror. Not terrorism... TERROR. HORROR.

Originally posted by QQXXw
reply to post by kn0wh0w

 

The constitution is outdated and it is not worth clinging to it anymore. How would you like it if we judged you by medieval law? of course you would not like it.

Please leave America now.

Nice to know there are still a few good judges in America. However unless Ron Paul gets in, I'd imagine it's only a matter of time before someone reverses this ruling. Ultimately they want the powers of a dictatorship and both DemRep "sides" are united on the issue -got to put those FEMA camps to real some day, hay?

Originally posted by A-Dub
Its good to see there are some legit judges left, but if they want to get this enforced they will just bypass her with an appeal to a higher court that they have in their pocket

correction: all they have to do is bypass her and send the case to the Military.

Originally posted by QQXXw
reply to post by kn0wh0w

 

The constitution is outdated and it is not worth clinging to it anymore. How would you like it if we judged you by medieval law? of course you would not like it.

The Constitution is NOT about "Law", it is about the freedoms afforded American citizens. There isn't a provision in the Constitution that could be considered "medieval". Either you have no idea what that word means or you have no idea what the Constitution says, but in either case, educate yourself before you spew such ignorance.

Originally posted by QQXXw
reply to post by kn0wh0w

 

The constitution is outdated and it is not worth clinging to it anymore. How would you like it if we judged you by medieval law? of course you would not like it.

Thank you for helping me prove my theory.

There is ALWAYS one in EVERY thread.

Gauranteed.

Never fails.

Set your watch to it.

Are some people really putting this all on Obama? The bill passed with overwhelming majority. Even if Obama vetoed it, overwhelming majority overrides a veto. As I understood it, the repubs like John McCain were pushing to keep the broad & controversial language in the bill.

And theres this:
"Yesterday evening, the Obama Administration issued a policy directive that effectively negates much of the NDAA’s section 1022, the section that purports to require that non-citizens suspected of strong links to terrorism be held in military, rather than civilian, custody.
Using a national security rationale, the directive reverses the presumption of military detention that section 1022 had established." says Joanne Mariner, director of Hunter College’s Human Rights Program at her blog Verdict."

verdict.justia.com...

reply to post by MuonSpin


Anyways, regardless of who was responsible for the NDAA 2012 monstrosity, it's a good thing the judge did what she did. It gives one hope.

Originally posted by Screwed

Originally posted by QQXXw
reply to post by kn0wh0w

 

The constitution is outdated and it is not worth clinging to it anymore. How would you like it if we judged you by medieval law? of course you would not like it.

Thank you for helping me prove my theory.

There is ALWAYS one in EVERY thread.

Gauranteed.

Never fails.

Set your watch to it.

edit on 8-6-2012 by Screwed because: (no reason given)

Someone with a different opinion? What does this mean to you?