Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What is Senate Bill 1867?
11/29/2011 | Toespi

Posted on 11/29/2011 4:45:52 PM PST by Toespi

Just heard about this, what is going on?


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 11/29/2011 4:45:55 PM PST by Toespi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Toespi

Bipartisan legislation being considered in the U.S. Senate would expand the military’s power to go after any terrorism suspect, including American citizens, anywhere in the world—including within the United States—and confine them indefinitely without being charged or tried.

S. 1867, referred to as the National Defense Authorization Act bill, was drafted in secret by Senators Carl Levin (D-Michigan) and John McCain (R-Arizona) and was scheduled for a vote by the full Senate on Tuesday.

Voices on both the right and left have expressed concerns about the bill, including the American Civil Liberties Union and Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul.

Senator Mark Udall (D-Colorado) has introduced an amendment to S. 1867 that would “delete the harmful provisions and replace them with a requirement for an orderly Congressional review of detention power,” according to the ACLU. “The Udall Amendment will make sure that the bill matches up with American values.”

The provision has also drawn the ire of high-ranking officials in the executive branch who see it as a usurpation of power by the military. FBI Director Robert Mueller wrote a letter to members of Congress raising his own concerns and stating that “The legislation ... will inhibit our ability to convince covered arrestees to cooperate immediately, and provide critical intelligence.” President Barack Obama has threatened to veto the bill.


2 posted on 11/29/2011 4:48:54 PM PST by Mikey_1962 (Obama: The Affirmative Action President.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Toespi

http://www.allgov.com/Top_Stories/ViewNews/Senate_Bill_Allows_Indefinite_Imprisonment_of_Americans_without_Trial_1111

ipartisan legislation being considered in the U.S. Senate would expand the military’s power to go after any terrorism suspect, including American citizens, anywhere in the world—including within the United States—and confine them indefinitely without being charged or tried.

S. 1867, referred to as the National Defense Authorization Act bill, was drafted in secret by Senators Carl Levin (D-Michigan) and John McCain (R-Arizona) and was scheduled for a vote by the full Senate on Tuesday.

Voices on both the right and left have expressed concerns about the bill, including the American Civil Liberties Union and Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul.

Senator Mark Udall (D-Colorado) has introduced an amendment to S. 1867 that would “delete the harmful provisions and replace them with a requirement for an orderly Congressional review of detention power,” according to the ACLU. “The Udall Amendment will make sure that the bill matches up with American values.”29


3 posted on 11/29/2011 4:49:15 PM PST by GR_Jr.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Toespi

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112zIKYC8:e462417:


4 posted on 11/29/2011 4:51:59 PM PST by mgstarr ("Some of us drink because we're not poets." Arthur (1981))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Toespi

McCain has become a less-than-useful idiot. He’s going senile and needs to resign.

Thanks, Arizona for this albatross for another six years.


5 posted on 11/29/2011 4:54:38 PM PST by 2nd Bn, 11th Mar (The "p" in Democrat stands for patriotism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Toespi

Once power is given, it’s never rescinded! Also, the military isn’t after this power, it’s liberals and the executive branch.


6 posted on 11/29/2011 4:55:13 PM PST by elephantlips
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GR_Jr.

“drafted in secret”
“McCain”
“American citizens anywhere in the world”
“confine indefinitely without being tried or charged”

Maybe history does repeat itself....why was America founded?


7 posted on 11/29/2011 4:56:54 PM PST by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mikey_1962

Great synopsis, Mikey_1962. I wonder how much McCain will enjoy getting locked up as a terrorist traitor.


8 posted on 11/29/2011 4:57:52 PM PST by sergeantdave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Toespi
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 - Authorizes appropriations for the Department of Defense (DOD) for FY2012.

SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.

(a) Custody Pending Disposition Under Law of War- (1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.

(2) COVERED PERSONS- The requirement in paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose detention is authorized under section 1031 who is determined--

(A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda; and (B) to have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.

(3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR- For purposes of this subsection, the disposition of a person under the law of war has the meaning given in section 1031(c), except that no transfer otherwise described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be made unless consistent with the requirements of section 1033.

(4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY- The Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.

(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens- (1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States. (c) Implementation Procedures-...

9 posted on 11/29/2011 5:05:30 PM PST by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Toespi

The language I posted above is what was in the bill as of the cloture vote.


10 posted on 11/29/2011 5:07:10 PM PST by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2nd Bn, 11th Mar
This is nothing new for McCain, he has been doing things like this since the mid 90s, he just pretended not to do it during his run for president in 08, and his re-election campaign last year, then he reverted to the old John McCain.

Like you I can't understand how my fellow voters keep electing this old Traitor.

11 posted on 11/29/2011 5:09:53 PM PST by c-b 1 (Reporting from behind enemy lines, in occupied AZTLAN.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Toespi

http://democrats.senate.gov/2011/11/29/roll-call-vote-at-11am-wednesday-2nd-degree-filing-deadline-1030am-wednesday/

Nov 29, ’11 7:36 PM

Roll Call Vote at 11am Wednesday; 2nd Degree Filing Deadline 10:30am Wednesday

At approximately 11:00am on Wednesday, November 30th, the Senate will conduct a roll call vote on the motion to invoke cloture on S.1867, the Department of Defense Authorization Act. The filing deadline for all second degree amendments to S.1867 is 10:30am on Wednesday, November 30, 2011. If your Senator has a germane 2nd degree amendment and would like to preserve his or her right to offer, please send a signed copy of the amendment to the cloakroom prior to the deadline. If you have already filed, there is no need to re-file.

I believe some of these cretin are taking heat.


12 posted on 11/29/2011 5:11:47 PM PST by Texas Fossil (Government, even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mikey_1962
Udall's Amendment: SA 1112. Mr. UDALL of Colorado submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1867, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2012 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end of section 1031, add the following:

(f) Extension to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens.--The authority of the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons under this section extends to citizens of the United States and lawful resident aliens of the United States, except to the extent prohibited by the Constitution of the United States.

13 posted on 11/29/2011 5:13:07 PM PST by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

Today Al-Qaeda, tomorrow the Tea Party, and next week, OWS..


14 posted on 11/29/2011 5:21:59 PM PST by cardinal4 (Herman Cain is still my candidate..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: cardinal4

Did you read (4) (B)? Seems fairly straightforward to me.


15 posted on 11/29/2011 5:24:42 PM PST by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

There is a difference between a United States Citizen and a citizen of the united states.


16 posted on 11/29/2011 5:33:35 PM PST by phockthis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: phockthis

Pray tell what would that be?


17 posted on 11/29/2011 5:38:36 PM PST by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Toespi

“Just heard about this, what is going on?”

Near as I can figure, when you wade through it and check back to the references, it means (in brief) that US citizens are included among those who, if caught as a belligerent in hostilities against the United States, shall be subject to Military Law and the International Law of War. Among other things, that means:

They don’t get turned over to the civilian law enforcement to get read their Miranda rights and tried in a civilian court (if they come back after being released on bail).

They may be tried by a Military Commission if such trial is indicated.

They might be held till the end of hostilities which equates to indefinitely since we don’t know when hostilities will end.

Remember WWII? Belligerents from both sides who engaged in hostilities were held as prisoners of war till the end of hostilities. From the point of view of the time, they were being held indefinitely, since they did not know when WWII would end. And most of them never had a trial.


18 posted on 11/29/2011 5:48:43 PM PST by KrisKrinkle (Blessed be those who know the depth and breadth of their ignorance. Cursed be those who don't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

Remember the old saying that “ignorance of the law is no excuse”....


The term “United States” may be used in any one of several senses. [1] It may be merely the name of a sovereign* occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations. [2] It may designate the territory over which the sovereignty of the United States** extends, or [3] it may be the collective name of the states*** which are united by and under the Constitution.

[Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt, 324 U.S. 652 (1945)]
[brackets, numbers and emphasis added]

This same Court authority is cited by Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, in its definition of “United States”:

United States. This term has several meanings. [1] It may be merely the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in family of nations, [2] it may designate territory over which sovereignty of United States extends, or [3] it may be collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution. Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt, U.S. Ohio, 324 U.S. 652, 65 S.Ct. 870, 880, 89 L.Ed. 1252.

[brackets, numbers and emphasis added]

In the first sense, the term “United States*” can refer to the nation, or the American empire, as Justice Marshall called it. The “United States*” is one member of the United Nations. When you are traveling overseas, you would go to the U.S.* embassy for help with passports and the like. In this instance, you would come under the jurisdiction of the President, through his agents in the U.S.* State Department, where “U.S.*” refers to the sovereign nation. The Informer summarizes Citizenship in this “United States*” as follows:

1. I am a Citizen of the United States* like you are a Citizen of China. Here you have defined yourself as a National from a Nation with regard to another Nation. It is perfectly OK to call yourself a “Citizen of the United States*.” This is what everybody thinks the tax statutes are inferring. But notice the capital “C” in Citizen and where it is placed. Please go back to basic English.

[Which One Are You?, page 11]
[emphasis added]

Secondly, the term “United States**” can also refer to “the federal zone”, which is a separate nation-state over which the Congress has exclusive legislative jurisdiction. (See Appendix Y for a brief history describing how this second meaning evolved.) In this sense, the term “United States**” is a singular phrase. It would be proper, for example, to say, “The United States** is ...” or “Its jurisdiction is ...” and so on. The Informer describes citizenship in this United States** as follows:

2. I am a United States** citizen. Here you have defined yourself as a person residing in the District of Columbia, one of its Territories, or Federal enclaves (area within a Union State) or living abroad, which could be in one of the States of the Union or a foreign country. Therefore you are possessed by the entity United States** (Congress) because citizen is small case. Again go back to basic english [sic]. This is the “United States**” the tax statutes are referring to. Unless stated otherwise, such as 26 USC 6103(b)(5).

[Which One Are You?, page 11]
[emphasis added]

Thirdly, the term “United States***” can refer to the 50 sovereign States which are united by and under the Constitution for the United States of America. In this third sense, the term “United States***” does not include the federal zone, because the Congress does not have exclusive legislative authority over any of the 50 sovereign States of the Union. In this sense, the term “United States***” is a plural, collective term. It would be proper therefore to say, “These United States***” or “The United States*** are ...” and so on. The Informer completes the trio by describing Citizenship in these “United States***” as follows:

3. I am a Citizen of these United States***. Here you have defined yourself as a Citizen of all the 50 States united by and under the Constitution. You are not possessed by the Congress (United States**). In this way you have a national domicile, not a State or United States** domicile and are not subject to any instrumentality or subdivision of corporate governmental entities.

[Which One Are You?, pages 11-12]
[emphasis added]

Author and scholar Lori Jacques summarizes these three separate governmental jurisdictions in the same sequence, as follows:

It is noticeable that Possessions of the United States** and sovereign states of the United States*** of America are NOT joined under the title of “United States.” The president represents the sovereign United States* in foreign affairs through treaties, Congress represents the sovereign United States** in Territories and Possessions with Rules and Regulations, and the state citizens are the sovereignty of the United States*** united by and under the Constitution .... After becoming familiar with these historical facts, it becomes clear that in the Internal Revenue Code, Section 7701(a)(9), the term “United States**” is defined in the second of these senses as stated by the Supreme Court: it designates the territory over which the sovereignty of the United States** extends.

[A Ticket to Liberty, Nov. 1990, pages 22-23]
[emphasis added, italics in original]

It is very important to note the careful use of the word “sovereign” by Chief Justice Stone in the Hooven case. Of the three different meanings of “United States” which he articulates, the United States is “sovereign” in only two of those three meanings. This is not a grammatical oversight on the part of Justice Stone. Sovereignty is not a term to be used lightly, or without careful consideration. In fact, it is the foundation for all governmental authority in America, because it is always delegated downwards from the true source of sovereignty, the People themselves. This is the entire basis of our Constitutional Republic. Sovereignty is so very important and fundamental, an entire chapter of this book is later dedicated to this one subject (see Chapter 11 infra).

The federal zone, over which the sovereignty of the United States** extends, is the District of Columbia, the territories and possessions belonging to Congress, and a limited amount of land within the States of the Union, called federal “enclaves”.

The Secretary of the Treasury can only claim exclusive jurisdiction over this federal zone and over citizens of this zone. In particular, the federal enclaves within the 50 States can only come under the exclusive jurisdiction of Congress if they consist of land which has been properly “ceded” to Congress by the act of a State Legislature. A good example of a federal enclave is a “ceded” military base. The authority to exercise exclusive legislative jurisdiction over the District of Columbia and the federal enclaves originates in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 (”1:8:17”) in the U.S. Constitution. By virtue of the exclusive authority that is vested in Congress by this clause, Congress shall have the power:

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States**, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;

[Constitution for the United States of America]
[Article l, Section 8, Clause 17]
[emphasis added]

The power of Congress to exercise exclusive legislative authority over its territories and possessions, as distinct from the District of Columbia and the federal enclaves, is given by a different authority in the U.S. Constitution. This authority is Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2 (”4:3:2”), as follows:

The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States**; ....

[Constitution for the United States of America]
[Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2]
[emphasis added]


19 posted on 11/29/2011 5:50:27 PM PST by phockthis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: phockthis

All very well and good, but you still have not explained the difference between a citizen of the United States and a United States citizen. But you do get points for your attempt to change the subject.


20 posted on 11/29/2011 5:59:52 PM PST by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: cardinal4

Today Al-Qaeda, tomorrow the Tea Party, and next week, OWS..

You hit the nail right on the head. These are the three biggest threats to the staus quo that these folks have taken for granted all these years. We have obviously hit a sore spot with them.

21 posted on 11/29/2011 6:00:45 PM PST by kempster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Toespi

How would one prove you are not a terrorist against (mostly electronic) evidence so easily manufactured?


22 posted on 11/29/2011 6:06:02 PM PST by IamConservative ("The ability to speak eloquently is not to be confused with having something to say." - MP Hart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mikey_1962

Sounds like they are expecting an insurrection.


23 posted on 11/29/2011 6:23:54 PM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

10. How many classes of citizens are there, and how did this number come to be?

Answer: There are two (2) classes of citizens: State Citizens and federal citizens. The first class originates in the Qualifications Clauses in the U.S. Constitution, where the term “Citizen of the United States” is used. (See 1:2:2, 1:3:3 and 2:1:5.) Notice the UPPER-CASE “C” in “Citizen”.

The pertinent court cases have defined the term “United States” in these Clauses to mean “States United”, and the full term means “Citizen of ONE OF the States United”. See People v. De La Guerra, 40 Cal. 311, 337 (1870); Judge Pablo De La Guerra signed the California Constitution of 1849, when California first joined the Union. Similar terms are found in the Diversity Clause at Article III, Section 2, Clause 1, and in the Privileges and Immunities Clause at Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1. Prior to the Civil War, there was only one (1) class of Citizens under American Law. See the holding in Pannill v. Roanoke, 252 F. 910, 914 915 (1918), for definitive authority on this key point.

The second class originates in the 1866 Civil Rights Act, where the term “citizen of the United States” is used. This Act was later codified at 42 U.S.C. 1983. Notice the lower-case “c” in “citizen”. The pertinent court cases have held that Congress thereby created a municipal franchise primarily for members of the Negro race, who were freed by President Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation (a war measure), and later by the Thirteenth Amendment banning slavery and involuntary servitude. Compelling payment of a “tax” for which there is no liability statute is tantamount to involuntary servitude, and extortion.

Instead of using the unique term “federal citizen”, as found in Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, it is now clear that the Radical Republicans who sponsored the 1866 Civil Rights Act were attempting to confuse these two classes of citizens. Then, they attempted to elevate this second class to constitutional status, by proposing a 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. As we now know, that proposal was never ratified. (See Answer to Question 6 above.)

Numerous court cases have struggled to clarify the important differences between the two classes. One of the most definitive, and dispositive cases, is Pannill v. Roanoke, 252 F. 910, 914 915 (1918), which clearly held that federal citizens had no standing to sue under the Diversity Clause, because they were not even contemplated when Article III in the U.S. Constitution was first being drafted, circa 1787 A.D.

Another is Ex parte Knowles, 5 Cal. 300 (1855) in which the California Supreme Court ruled that there was no such thing as a “citizen of the United States” (as of the year 1855 A.D.). Only federal citizens have standing to invoke 42 U.S.C. 1983; whereas State Citizens do not. See Wadleigh v. Newhall, 136 F. 941 (C.C. Cal. 1905).

Many more cases can be cited to confirm the existence of two classes of citizens under American Law. These cases are thoroughly documented in the book entitled “The Federal Zone: Cracking the Code of Internal Revenue” by Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S., now in its eleventh edition. See also the pleadings in the case of USA v. Gilbertson, also in the Supreme Law Library.


24 posted on 11/29/2011 6:28:27 PM PST by phockthis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: phockthis

Excellent cutting and pasting skills, as well as skillful deployment of non sequiturs, but you still have not differentiated between the two phrases, and have attempted to muddy the waters and change the subject again by raising the subject of state “citizens,” which is a non-starter because nations have citizens, states have residents. Try again.


25 posted on 11/29/2011 6:49:38 PM PST by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Toespi

People over-reacting and misquoting legislation for the purposes of fear mongering and polemic. A previous poster gave you the exact text of the bill as presented prior to the cloture vote.

There are far more worrying pieces of legislation up for consideration.


26 posted on 11/29/2011 7:07:49 PM PST by brothers4thID (http://scarlettsays.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mikey_1962

I’d like to personally thank John McCain for providing living proof of the veracity of the statement that “The lesser of two evils is still evil.”


27 posted on 11/29/2011 11:14:46 PM PST by BellStar (Be strong ........Joshua 1:6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mikey_1962

I’d like to personally thank John McCain for providing living proof of the veracity of the statement that “The lesser of two evils is still evil.”


28 posted on 11/29/2011 11:14:53 PM PST by BellStar (Be strong ........Joshua 1:6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mikey_1962

I’d like to personally thank John McCain for providing living proof of the veracity of the statement that “The lesser of two evils is still evil.”


29 posted on 11/29/2011 11:15:00 PM PST by BellStar (Be strong ........Joshua 1:6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mikey_1962

I’d like to personally thank John McCain for providing living proof of the veracity of the statement that “The lesser of two evils is still evil.”


30 posted on 11/29/2011 11:15:12 PM PST by BellStar (Be strong ........Joshua 1:6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson