Senate votes down indefinite detention of Americans — or does it?
The latest draft of the NDAA remains problematic and may not even protect citizens from military detention
Topics: Indefinite Detention, Dianne Feinstein, NDAA, U.S. Senate, Chris Hedges, Civil Liberties, Terrorism, News
Guantanamo protesters kneel during the Democratic National Convention 2008 (Credit: Shutterstock/ Lilac Mountain)The Senate on Thursday voted in favor of a narrow amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act in the hope of ensuring an end to the indefinite detention of Americans. The newest draft of the 2013 act now includes provisions that aim to protect citizens inside the U.S. from military imprisonment, thanks to an amendment introduced by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.
Within hours of the amendment’s approval, civil liberties advocates pointed out significant problems that remain in the NDAA, while lawyers noted that the amendment may even fail to achieve its intended purpose regarding the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens and permanent residents. Under the 2012 act, any person suspected of terrorism or substantial support for terrorism in the U.S.could be held without trial indefinitely. To ensure the writ of habeas corpus, the newest draft includes the following:
Nothing in the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) or the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81) shall be construed to deny the availability of the writ of habeas corpus or to deny any Constitutional rights in a court ordained or established by or under Article III of the Constitution for any person who is lawfully in the United States when detained pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) and who is otherwise entitled to the availability of such writ or such rights,” reads Sec 1033 (a) of the proposed Pentagon spending bill.
The Senate approved Feinstein’s amendment 67 to 29, but it is yet to be signed into law by the president. The controversial indefinite detention provisions in previous versions of the NDAA have provoked outcry from high-profile civil liberties advocates. President Obama faces a lawsuit brought by Pulitzer Prize winner Chris Hedges, Daniel Ellsberg and six other plaintiffs including Noam Chomsky and Naomi Wolf over the provision. Despite a federal court judge granting an injunction against the controversial provision, the Obama administration’s attorneys immediately filed an appeal to stay the injunction and won. As such, the changes to the 2013 act would appear a great victory for Hedges and co. Not so fast, says their attorney.
Bruce Afran, the attorney representing Hedges and his fellow plaintiffs in the NDAA suit, told Business Insider that the newest draft of the act may in fact make it even easier to detain citizens indefinitely:
Continue Reading CloseNatasha Lennard is an assistant news editor at Salon, covering non-electoral politics, general news and rabble-rousing. Follow her on Twitter @natashalennard, email nlennard@salon.com. More Natasha Lennard.


Comments
2 Comments