Victory: Activist Sue Obama, Judge Rules NDAA Unconstitutional
In a stunning turnaround for an act of Congress, a judge ruled Wednesday that a counterterrorism provision of the National Defense Authorization Act, an annual defense appropriations bill, is unconstitutional. Federal district Judge Katherine B. Forrest issued an injunction against use of the provision on behalf of a group of journalists and activists who had filed suit in March, claiming it would chill free speech./p>
In her decision published Wednesday, Forrest, in the Southern District of New York, ruled that Section 1021 of NDAA was facially unconstitutional — a rare finding — because of the potential that it could violate the 1st Amendment.
“Plaintiffs have stated a more than plausible claim that the statute inappropriately encroaches on their rights under the First Amendment,” she wrote, addressing the constitutional challenge.
Seven individuals, including Pulitzer Prize-winning former New York Times foreign correspondent Chris Hedges, MIT linguist Noam Chomsky and “Pentagon Papers” activist Daniel Ellsberg, had sued President Barack Obama, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, and a host of other government officials, stating they were forced to curtail some of their reporting and activist activities for fear of violating Section 1021. That section prohibits providing substantial support for terrorist groups, but gives little definition of what that means. Environmental activists were also poised to join the suit if it expanded.
The suit demands that Congress cut or reform this section of the law, which allows the U.S. military to indefinitely detain without charges anyone — including U.S. citizens — who may have “substantially supported” terrorists or their “associated forces,” without defining what those terms mean. President Obama signed the bill on Dec 31, 2011, with a signing statement saying that the law was redundant of powers already provided to the government under the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (passed after 9/11), and that these powers would not be used against U.S. citizens. The next administration may decide differently, however.
NDAA 2013: The House Approves Indefinite Detention of American Citizens, Pro-Government Propaganda, Gay Marriage Prohibition In The Military, etc.
Reauthorizing the indefinite detention of US citizens without charge might be the scariest provision in next year’s defense spending bill, but it certainly isn’t the only one worth worrying about.
An amendment tagged on the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 would allow for the United States government to create and distribute pro-American propaganda within the country’s own borders under the alleged purpose of putting al-Qaeda’s attempts at persuading the world against Western ideals on ice. Former US representatives went out of there way to ensure their citizens that they’d be excluded from government-created media blasts, but two lawmakers currently serving the country are looking to change all that.
Congressmen Mac Thornberry (R-TX) and Adam Smith (D-WA) introduced “The Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012” (H.R. 5736) last week during discussions for the NDAA 2013. It was voted on by the US House of Representatives to be included in next year’s defense spending bill, which was then voted on as a whole and approved. The amendment updates the antiquated Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 and Foreign Relations Authorization Act of 1987, essentially clarifying that the US State Department and the Broadcasting Board of Governors may“prepare, disseminate and use public diplomacy information abroad,” but while also striking down a long-lasting ban on the domestic dissemination in America.
Activists To Sue Obama, Others Over National Defense Authorization Act
A coalition of well-known journalists, activists and civil libertarians will sue President Obama, Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr., Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and other members of the U.S. government to push them to remove or rewrite this year’s defense appropriations bill, saying it chills speech by threatening constitutionally protected activities such as news reporting, protest and political organizing in defense of controversial causes such as the Wikileaks case.
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit, which was launched by former New York Times foreign correspondent Chris Hedges, claim that the new provisions, which went into effect March 1, not only put them at risk of arrest but also allows indefinite detentions of U.S. citizens on U.S. soil, and that the provisions are too vague.
Environmentalists have also registered their opposition. In light of many prosecutions of U.S. environmental activists under ramped-up terror laws in the past six years, many fear the new law will be used against them.
“My activities as a civil liberties, democracy advocate and independent journalist definitely leave me under the purview of the vague language of the NDAA [National Defense Authorization Act],” says Jennifer “Tangerine” Bolen, one of seven current plaintiffs, along with Hedges, in the suit. A host of live panel discussions with what she calls “activists and revolutionaries” as part of independent media outlet Revolution Truth, Bolen has had ongoing contact with Wikileaks activists in an effort to get information to the public.
“I believe that could leave me in imminent danger of harm,” she says. “There was a global, trans-partisan, outpouring of distress over Obama signing the NDAA into law on Dec. 31, 2011, and I decided I had to do something.”
Tell Congress To Undo The NDAA, Ban Indefinite Military Detention Of Americans
President Obama just signed the National Defense Authorization Act into law despite startling provisions that will allow the military to indefinitely detain American citizens. It’s a travesty, defying basic principles of justice and due process in perhaps the most extreme respect our nation has ever seen.
Thankfully, several lawmakers are keeping up the fight. Senator Dianne Feinstein has introduced legislation to undo these provisions of the NDAA, in the form of the Due Process Guarantee Act. We need to urge other Senators to support it.
The Due Process Guarantee Act of 2011 amends the Non-Detention Act of 1971 by providing that a Congressional authorization for the use of military force does not authorize the indefinite detention—without charge or trial—of U.S. citizens who are apprehended domestically.
If there’s enough of a public outcry, we have a real chance of making this happen: More than 40 senators voted against the indefinite detention provisions of the NDAA — and that was before the media and general public caught on to what was happening. Please urge your Senators to remedy this terrible wrong.
Just fill out the form here (to the right) to urge your lawmakers to block the indefinite detention of Americans
Here’s Feinstein’s press release on her new legislation.
She was charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest though it’s unclear how Digioia’s “disorderly conduct” differed from the other yelling demonstrators, except for the obvious fact that she was leading them to yell about NDAA.
Nationwide NDAA 2012 Congressional Protest
When Friday, February 3, 2012 Time 12:00pm until 7:00pm Where Congressional Offices Throughout the Country
Description: Americans throughout the country will gather outside congressional offices Feb. 3rd from noon to 7 p.m. to protest NDAA 2012 (H.R. 1540) - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012. NDAA 2012 allows for Americans to be indefinitely detained without access to an attorney or a trial by jury. The objective of our demonstration is to have our congressmen repeal the indefinite detainment of Americans without due process sections of the bill. If you are a member of a liberty oriented organization or meetup please notify other members of the event. Participants should notify the local and national media of their protests. Congress and President Obama have declared war on Americans. The last time America was declared a military zone President Roosevelt authorized the internment of Americans with Executive Order 9066, issued February 19, 1942. Senator Graham has said that America is part of the battlefield, and as such, Americans can be captured, interrogated, and killed with no due process. NDAA 2012 repeals the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th amendments to the Constitution. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and declares our right to due process. No law shall supersede it. We have a right to our day in court with a jury of our peers. Once again, our government has treaded on our heritage and our Constitution. Do something about it! Page 359 - (S. 1867 - NDAA 2012) - Indefinite Detention How your congressmen voted: House Senate
When the clock strikes 12 the NDAA of Fiscal Year 2012 will go into effect.
Happy New Years.
Today Obama declared the U.S. “a battlefield” by signing the NDAA.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 allows Dictator President Obama (and future presidents) to detain any person, including U.S. citizens, INDEFINITELY with out trial or charge if they supportal-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces and declare the U.S. a battlefield.
In London, Occupy London protesters have been labeled by their government as terrorist. If the U.S. follows, Occupy Protesters, or any protester that the government deems a terrorist could be detained by The United States Armed Forces and even transferred to foreign prisons where they can be tortured.
2012 will definitely be an interesting year.
BREAKING NEWS: OBAMA SIGNED NDAA INTO LAW
NDAA Vote Could Force Recall of Montana Senators, Congressman
On Christmas Day, Montanans decided to give their Congressional district a gift they won’t soon forget— a notice of possible recall of the Senators and one Congressman who voted for the controversial, National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).
The recall effort was started by William Crain, an artist, and by Stewart Rhodes, an attorney and national president of the organization, The Oath Keepers.
Their intentions are to oust Senators Max Baucus (D) and Jonathan Tester (D) as well as Representative Denny Rehberg (R) from office for voting for a bill that, many say, decimates America’s Bill of Rights.
Montana is one of only 9 states that allow for recall of members of its federal congressional delegations based on “violations of oath of office” among other issues. (The other 8 states that allow such recalls are Arizona, Colorado, Louisiana, Michigan, Nevada, North Dakota, Oregon, and Wisconsin).
In their press release, Rhodes (a former staffer of Rep. Ron Paul) said:
These politicians from both parties betrayed our trust, and violated the oath they took to defend the Constitution. It’s not about the left or right, it’s about our Bill of Rights. Without the Bill of Rights, there is no America. It is the Crown Jewel of our Constitution, and the high-water mark of Western Civilization.
Capitalist, fascists, conservatives and Bush/Obama supporters are not welcomed. Don't bother following if you are white and refuse to recognize your privilege.
Warning: This blog may offend pacifists, patriarchist, misogynists, patriots, Obama supporters, privileged white folks and 1%ers.
![Activists To Sue Obama, Others Over National Defense Authorization Act
A coalition of well-known journalists, activists and civil libertarians will sue President Obama, Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr., Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and other members of the U.S. government to push them to remove or rewrite this year’s defense appropriations bill, saying it chills speech by threatening constitutionally protected activities such as news reporting, protest and political organizing in defense of controversial causes such as the Wikileaks case.
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit, which was launched by former New York Times foreign correspondent Chris Hedges, claim that the new provisions, which went into effect March 1, not only put them at risk of arrest but also allows indefinite detentions of U.S. citizens on U.S. soil, and that the provisions are too vague.
Environmentalists have also registered their opposition. In light of many prosecutions of U.S. environmental activists under ramped-up terror laws in the past six years, many fear the new law will be used against them.
“My activities as a civil liberties, democracy advocate and independent journalist definitely leave me under the purview of the vague language of the NDAA [National Defense Authorization Act],” says Jennifer “Tangerine” Bolen, one of seven current plaintiffs, along with Hedges, in the suit. A host of live panel discussions with what she calls “activists and revolutionaries” as part of independent media outlet Revolution Truth, Bolen has had ongoing contact with Wikileaks activists in an effort to get information to the public.
“I believe that could leave me in imminent danger of harm,” she says. “There was a global, trans-partisan, outpouring of distress over Obama signing the NDAA into law on Dec. 31, 2011, and I decided I had to do something.”
Source](http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m2r6qg1jvv1r4vpxio1_500.jpg)
