Founded in 1991, the Republican Liberty Caucus works to advance the principles of limited government, free markets and individual liberty within the Republican Party.

Action Alert: Stop Indefinite Military Detention of US Citizens

By Dave Nalle - November 28, 2011 at 1:23 PM
Filed under Civil Liberties , Courts , Take Action!


UPDATE: Unamended Bill Headed for Reconciliation

12/1/11 – As you may have seen in the news the Udall Amendment was defeated yesterday, mostly along partisan lines, though there was some commentary from the opposition about the unusual level of constituent email supporting the amendment. They noticed, but unsurprisingly they did not listen to the people. The Feinstein Amendment which was a last ditch effort to fix the language in the bill also failed today. The fight isn’t over. It’s still worth contacting both your Congressman and Senators to encourage them to support the removal of sections 1031 and 1032 in the reconciliation process. This is our last chance to fix the bill and protect our liberties short of hoping for a veto from President Obama. The letter-writing tool below has been modified to reflect the current situation. Even if you sent an email before it’s worth sending another now.

UPDATE: Another Chance to Prevent Indefinite Military Detention

12/1/11 – Although the Paul and Udall Amendments failed yesterday, we have another chance to get indefinite military detention out of the UDAA. Two Amendments from Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) are still pending and will be voted on at 5pm today. They will edit the language of sections 1031 and 1032 to remove the possibility of indefinite military detention. They are a reasonable alternative to the Paul and Udall Amendments and Senators Paul, Udall and Mike Lee will be supporting them along with a growing coalition of other Senators. They are only a handful of votes short of passing these amendments, so if we could win over a few more Republican votes that might make all the difference. At the end of this article is an expanded list of Senators who you could call today before 2pm EST and encourage to vote for the Feinstein Amendments. Please take a few minutes to make the calls. It’s also still useful to email your Senators, especially if they are on the target list.

Here is video from Tuesday’s Senate debate where Sen. Ran Paul asks Sen. John McCain directly about the detention issue and gets a non-answer, with a craven appeal to public opinion, which amounts to an admission that McCain intended the bill to provide for military detention of civilians

UPDATE: Delay of Senate Debate on Defense Bill Offers More Time for Action

11/29/11 – Although this bill was scheduled for a vote on Monday, deliberations were put off until today, so you still have time to contact your Senators. Additional info for calling key Senators is included bwlow. In addition, Senator Paul will be speaking about the bill at 10:55 EST on the floor of the Senate. You can watch the speech on CSPAN2 if their schedule is correct. It can also be watched online.

Stop Indefinite Military Detention of US CitizensIf the new Defense Authorization bill passes then the military will be able to arrest US Citizens within the United States and hold them indefinitely without charge or trial in military prisons or try them before military tribunals without the protections guaranteed in the Bill of Rights.

Take Action to Stop Indefinite Military Detention of US Citizens

With very little notice and a vote which may come as early as TODAY (Monday) the U.S. Senate will vote on the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA) which was written and passed through committee in secret. It includes two sections which would change laws on military detention to authorize the military to imprison almost anyone without due process of law or any respect for their civil liberties, including Americans in foreign countries and those living in the United States. Those detained by the military under this law could be held indefinitely without charge or trial and they could end up in military courts instead of civilian courts.

The NDAA is almost certain to pass with strong bipartisan support. We don’t have the votes to stop it, though some RLC endorsees like Sen. Rand Paul oppose many sections of the bill.  It is likely that it will hit the Senate floor in the next few days with the backing of powerful Republicans like John McCain, who authored this unconstitutional expansion of military authority, who will be pushing to pass it without revision.

You may think that this sort of insane legislation which totally undermines our Constitutionally protected rights can’t be real. You may find it hard to believe that most Republicans are supporting it. You may not think this could happen in your America. Yet this outrage is entirely real.

I urge you to read the contents of S.1867 (PDF), particularly sections 1031 and 1032, and see for yourself

While the RLC also objects to other aspects of this bill, we probably can’t stop the bill from passing, but there is at least a way to oppose these particularly horrendous provisions and get them removed from the bill. Senator Rand Paul has offered an amendment (#1067) to strike the two sections from the bill and Senator Mark Udall has put out a similar amendment (#1107). The Senate needs to pass one of these amendments and protect our rights.

Please urge your Senators to protect our rights and the Constitution and oppose sections 1031 and 1032 of the Defense Authorization bill by voting for the Udall Amendment. Act now. The vote may come as early as Monday.

You can do this by using the form below to send them an email today.  We encourage you to customize the text to express your personal concern and outrage.

In addition, there are several Senators who we believe ought to be targeted for direct phonecalls from voters nationwide because they are likely swing votes. Please take time to call them at the numbers below. Just say that you’d like them to oppose military detention in sections 1031 and 1032 of the defense bill.

Pat Toomey (RLC-PA) – (202) 224-4254
Jim DeMint (RLC-SC) – (202) 224-6121
Ron Johnson (R-WI) – (202) 224-5323
Marco Rubio (R-FL) – (202) 224-3041
Olympia Snowe (R-ME) – (202) 224-5344
Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) – (202) 224-6665
Dean Heller (R-NV) – (202) 224-6244
Dick Lugar (R-IN) – (202) 224-4814


The views expressed here are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.
Permalink Comments Off
 
  • Adrian Salsgiver

    Free Bradley Manning! The government is criminal and out-of-control. 

    http://www.bradleymanning.org/

  • Landnnut

    The emails sent by this tool do not seem to be getting through to my Senator. I always get a thanks for contacting me email from my Senator and I have not been getting one when I send an email with this tool.
    L&N nut
    Jon

  • Mrford

    fellas, there’s a line in the bill that excludes US citizens from the bills provisions. Still an awful bill but I hate to see you promoting erroneous info! Check it out.

  • Matt Collins
  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Teddy-Lancaster/1296407888 Teddy Lancaster

    This is getting to be FAR too much!!!  Watch the film “Thrive” to discover the “plan” and help inform America before it is too late!

  • Curtis Wolf

    Did
    the RLC actually read this bill before they wrote up this action alert?
    It says very specifically in section 1032 (b) (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.” I am
    concerned about military confinement of individuals in a “war” against
    terrorism with no clear end in sight, but the sections 1031 and 1032 are
    not going to lead to the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens.  I think that someone is confusing this bill with S 3081 introduced in the previous Congress which does
    allow the detention of U.S. citizens.
     

  • Anonymous

    Curtis.  First off, the section you cite only waives military detention as a requirement.  It does not prohibit it.  Also, an earlier section authorizes the waiver of almost all of the qualifications for detention for national security reasons.  Taken together they basically add up to putting anyone into military detention with no real safeguards.

  • Anonymous

     Read it again.  It does not exclude US citizens, it merely leaves the option open for either civil or military detainment and prosecution.  It does not take military detainment out of the picture.

  • Anonymous

     I know some have gotten responses, but I didn’t get one either.  However the last time I used the tool I did get a response.  It may be that the Senators are swamped with emails.

  • diverduck

    When I checked on the bill and the amendments, it appears that 1067 was submitted by Kelly Ayotte, not Rand Paul and it didn’t seem to me to be really that relevant. 

    On a seemingly different topic: 
    When I looked for the amendments, I found text authorizing the Comptroller General to investigate each states actions related to voter id laws and report on them and prosecutions for voter fraud, etc.  It is time the Feds stayed out of voter laws …   As I recall the Constitution gives voter legislation to the states.  There are too many Fed employees, they stick their noses into places that they have no business. 

  • Mr. Klein

    Mr wolf, I also agree with you regarding section 1031-32. if those items were struck that may allow for the very thing which we appose.
         a larger problem is the defense spending. this bill should be defeated on ths face of its spending alone. we need to bring the troops home and stop the “rent seekers” for stealing more of our money…

        Troop levels are increasing, and why are we buying more military hardware such as the Joint strike fighter?  our economy is imploding, we need tax cuts and spending cuts…. I cant believe there is not a balance budget amendment on the table, which would reassert gold as the only legal tender specie of the USA… that what we need to be discussing.

    saving our economy is a national security imperative!

  • Mr. Klein

    which section?

  • Gary T

    What I sent to my Senators:

    As our representatives, you are supposed to be protecting Americans, not only from foreign threats but from governmental domestic threats as well.This legislation is the road to the Nazification of America.The people will not stand for this much longer, and as in the middle east we will vote to change our so called leaders.You pass this legislation at the risk of political suicide. Voters who have never even cared about the political process are becoming aware of the encroachment of civil liberties our government is effecting.
    Do not vote for this horrendous set of laws.

  • Landnnut

    its an automated response so I should be  getting it no matter how busy they are. 

  • Anonymous

    1031, the immediate previous section.  You guys should all watch yesterday’s debate on the Udall amendment.  John McCain clearly says that the bill would allow for indefinite detention of US citizens and he wrote the thing.

  • Anonymous

    It took more than 24 hours for my response from John Cornyn to reach me.

  • Annie

    Please forgive me I am just trying to wrap my mind around what all this means or could mean. I’ve listened to the speeches from Rand Paul, but I am still confused as to what exactly the opposition to this is? Does this section mean this applies to anyone basically who is trying to overthrow the government like in Egypt when they had the spring riots? (B) to have participated in the course of
    22 planning or carrying out an attack or attempted
    23 attack against the United States or its coalition

    Is that the point- that we would no longer be able to overthrow the government if it became tyrannical without the threat of detention without trial? I’m confused by all this language! Help me out.

  • http://whiteylawful.tumblr.com Wesley Mcgranor

    I wouldn’t doubt it.

  • Anonymous

    Didn’t Stalin have his gulags and Hitler his ghettos? Call it a retraining center doesn’t make it stink any less. Its ambiguous to say the least and a crime against the Constitution and “We the People” to say the most.

blog comments powered by Disqus