White House Drafts Executive Order for Indefinite Detention

propublica ^ | Dec. 21, 2010 | Dafna Linzer

[Lurker]

Remind me again, please. Where in the US Constitution Article 2, Section 1 is this power granted to the President?

[woodbutcher1963]

Isn’t this something that the ACLU/MSM should be sceaming about ?

Oh I forgot, Obama is not George Bush.

[SuperLuminal]

Just prepping the field for full implementation and enforcement of the latest FCC decision..

[swain_forkbeard]

Please tell me this EO does not apply to US citizens.

[matt1234]

Please tell me this EO does not apply to US citizens.

I guess we'll know when the see the signed version.

[Secret Agent Man]

All Republican reps and senators, you will now be indefinitely detained.

[Red Dog #1]

These are military prisoners, captured during an armed conflict. Why wouldn't the President have the authority to deal with them with as long as he doesn't contradict public law?

Now that being said, I don't have much faith in him to properly utilize his authority.

[jakerobins]

Just remeber who Obama’s “Enemies” are...and how he wanted to Punish them......

[Lurker]

These are military prisoners, captured during an armed conflict. Why wouldn't the President have the authority to deal with them with as long as he doesn't contradict public law?

That pesky Constitution.

From Article 1, Section 8. The Powers of Congress:

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

The President has no such authority.

[Mariner]

"Remind me again, please. Where in the US Constitution Article 2, Section 1 is this power granted to the President? "

The CiC has the authority to take and hold enemy combatants as prisoners. ESPECIALLY outside the US.

Always had such authority.

[Lurker]

The CiC has the authority to take and hold enemy combatants as prisoners.

Really? That's not what the Constitution says. See post 8.

[Red Dog #1]

I'm definitely not a constitutional lawyer, but I'd be surprised if a challenge to this EO based on a separation of powers argument would go anywhere. Unless there's a contradiction to the “Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water” made by Congress, I'd expect Holder's Justice Department to argue the EO is simply a means to carry out those rules.

That said, I have little doubt that the reviews are little more than a fig leaf to cover releasing more terrorist.

[Lurker]

and his assertion that the congressional authorization for military force, passed after the 2001 terrorist attacks, allows for such detention.

I'd like to see the Section of that authorization that allows the President to decree indefinete detention. I've got a buck that says it ain't in there.

[Constitution Day]

BFL

[Red Dog #1]

"I'd like to see the Section of that authorization..."

That's something we can agree on. It all comes down the letter of the law...

[R0CK3T]

Why do I get the feeling that 0bama might have uses for this other than those now at Gitmo?

Sooner or later he will reveal his basic instinct to be that of a Dictator who laughs at the mere notion of a Government with checks and balances.

[onedoug]

An islamist runs a war against islamism. Yeah, that makes sense.

[Eleutheria5]

Now while they’re being indefinitely detained, they’ll need some entertainment. How about poolside chats with intelligence agents, only it’s a real small swimming pool, and they can’t get out of it until after the chat is over, and part of the fun will include playful dunking every now and then, as the chat warrants it.

[KDD]

http://smargus.com/2010/03/indefinite-detention-of-americans-act-contact-sheet/