31 votes

Federal Court Rules In Favour Of Indefinite Detention Of US Citizens

A federal appeals court has ruled that the US government can still indefinitely detain citizens should it wish to do so, under the Obama Administration’s National Defense Authorization Act.

The ruling came in the form of an extension of an “emergency” stay of a district court judge’s order that had previously struck down the defence bill’s provisions altogether.

Last month District Judge Katherine Forrest permanently blocked the NDAA provision, saying that “First Amendment rights have already been harmed and will be harmed by the prospect of (the law) being enforced.”

However, the very next day the Obama administration moved to appeal the decision in an attempt to reinstate the indefinite detention provisions. The administration characterized the ruling by Forrest as unconstitutional.

Federal judge in New York, Raymond Lohier, then granted the Obama administration an “emergency” stay that temporarily blocks Forrest’s ruling.

Continue:
http://www.infowars.com/federal-court-rules-in-favour-of-ind...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

It seems perfectly evident to

It seems perfectly evident to me that a system of "checks and balances" coupled with a monopoly use of force is an untenable situation. if the history of this country is any lesson, it's that the best intended constitution cannot be protected from the perpetual flow of quislings and fools seeking to erode it. "eternal vigilance" is simply not a viable option. there will always be 1,000,000 self-serving politicians for every statesman. it's a process you can slow down, but probably never stop.

Of course

they did.

U.S. Citizens

Does the ruling specifically say U.S. Citizens? Check out the pdf below, it has some interesting diagrams. If the ruling applies only to the people of the red circle, it may be time to become a blue circle person for this and other reasons.

http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/Citizenship/citizenshi...

Just because

a "Judge" says its ok does not mean it is, The do not have the power to override the Constitution. Its only allowed if we allow it by doing nothing.

any murderers

who go through with these actions need to be made an example of harshly by the people for this to stop, remember its a game of force and when enough folks come to aid it will stop.

OH NO !!

States should secede

It's about time that the states secede from the Union.

INSANITY

This is no longer America.

The desperation to keep this

The desperation to keep this alive alive is staggering, I'm pretty sure this happened mid-September though.

it is a full on takeover of the judicial system.

in law school I can see it everywhere... it is happening, get ready... the structure is being prepared to punish anonymity and control the internet so that our uprising will one day become a myth.

example:

I had to attend a mandatory symposium where I was passed out flyers by the organization, for whom each of their "about me" pages claimed to be libertarian, I thought that was odd at first considering there message was to preserve accuracy of information by regulatinf first amendment rights in public forums...

In the symposium they discussed how the internet is becoming more and more of a public forum, and how anonymity disrupts government policy objectives from being accurate and enforceable.

They then proceeded to tell the audience that they were looking for public interest lawyers who wanted to help create legal language delegating regulation of first amendment rights to the US patent office, to be enforced by congress as to its procedure. (of course we all know the discretion will be in the hands of few)

essentially, the symposium was cloaked in libertarianism, intended to look progressive as to enforcing accountability on the internet, but was a recruitment process to develop a new INGSOC authority over the internet.

they wanted a adminstrative agency to be able to unilaterally shut people out of websites deeming them against public policy; they wanted to be able to define what is extreme.

They are going around the country to every law school as we speak.... Paving the way for the next form of tyranny. They were very keen on eliminating subjective information and creating a objective framework for regulating private websites and reforming them into quazi public forums.

THE WORST PART IS THAT IT WAS MANDATORY, SO IF I DIDNT GO I WOULD HAVE BEEN MARKED OFF PARTICIPATION.

heed my words, tyranny is reacting to us.

Whether you think you can or you can't, you're right. -Henry Ford

it is a full on takeover of the judicial system.

in law school I can see it everywhere... it is happening, get ready... the structure is being prepared to punish anonymity and control the internet so that our uprising will one day become a myth

Whether you think you can or you can't, you're right. -Henry Ford

So a judge"s ruling...

From the article...

"The administration characterized the ruling by Forrest as unconstitutional."

A judge's ruling cannot BE unconstitutional. It can be overruled by a higher court's decision, but by definition, a judge's ruling IS the constitution.

What a joke.

You know, one would have

You know, one would have thought there would be at least a peep heard from the public on the day we went to a full fledged tyrannical dictatorship! Surprisingly, not a word was heard! Sad.

One word...

Nullification!

sharkhearted's picture

So the 2nd Court of Appeals just committed Treason

These people have no regard for the Constitution and the Magna Carta for that matter.

This is not over.

Time to light the torches lol.

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

So its unConstitutional to obey the Constitution?

Do these judges ruling actually believe what they are saying? That the arrest of journalists and activists could never possibly happen? How do these people look at themselves in the mirror without projectile vomiting?

Thanks for posting this article.

Thanks DeMolay & others who posted comments here

Police state strides forward.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

I think this is important

Why no comments?

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Important ??? Absolutly!!

Perhaps readers don't relise this is recent news. Here's a little more of the article. Maybe, take out what you have and replace with this portion.

"Late yesterday,(Oct2nd) a three-judge motions panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit extended that stay, supporting the administration’s appeal and intimating that Forrest’s ruling is flawed.

“We conclude that the public interest weighs in favor of granting the government’s motion for a stay,” Appeals Court Judges Denny Chin, Raymond Lohier and Christopher Droney wrote in a three-page order that also expedited the appeal.

All three judges on the panel were appointed to the appeals court by Obama."