Emmett, Idaho, Nullifies Indefinite Detention of NDAA

New American ^ | Wednesday, 08 January 2014 12:52 | Joe Wolverton, II, J.D.

[Hulka]

I know. That is what has me baffled, so many say so much but no one is actually quoting where the law allows such a thing.

Or maybe we are mishearing what he is saying.

Can’t recall but maybe he is saying indefinite detention of Americans captured abroad on the battlefield? I don’t know if that is what he is referring to. In that case, he might have a poiont of debate, but like wars past (US citizens returning to Germany to fight in WWII), they were POWs for the duration.

But like I said, all these people saying something but not actually citing the actual section of the law.

Why is that?

Do you have a theory?

Thanks for reminding me what the Judge said. I just sent an email to the judge asking for the relevant part of the law. We shall see if he responds.

Thus far I’ve emailed Cruz’s office and called and asked his the staff to ask Cruz for the actual law, and sent an email to the Speaker (like that will be answered), and I also sent an email to the Texas AG asking his thoughts about references to American citizens being grabbed off the street, authorized by the NDAA. No one has yet replied.

Baffles me.

[bobby.223]

The Judge is/has always been someone who’s opinion on all things legal I respect. He has quite a few opinions out there in print and video on the NDAA’s indefinite detention. I will be very curious to hear if he responds to your email questions. Thanks for taking the time to try to get this entire thing clarified.

[Hulka]

I’m with you on the Judge.

Good man.

I’ll let you know if I hear back from him or anyone.