You are here: Home / Blogs / Coachisright / Judge strikes down NDAA, rules Obama must

You are here: Home / Blogs / Coachisright / Judge strikes down NDAA, rules Obama must

This is a discussion on You are here: Home / Blogs / Coachisright / Judge strikes down NDAA, rules Obama must within the In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly forums, part of the The Back Porch category; Can you say police state... "In a considerable setback for a president eager to ravage the due process rights of the American people, Federal Judge ...

Results 1 to 7 of 7
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By Badey

Thread: You are here: Home / Blogs / Coachisright / Judge strikes down NDAA, rules Obama must

  1. #1
    Member Array Justified's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    423

    You are here: Home / Blogs / Coachisright / Judge strikes down NDAA, rules Obama must

    Can you say police state...

    "In a considerable setback for a president eager to ravage the due process rights of the American people, Federal Judge Kathleen Forrest granted a preliminary injunction on Wednesday, striking down those sections of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012 which sought to provide Barack Obama the power to indefinitely detain citizens without benefit of their 5th Amendment rights.

    Signed very quietly into law on New Year’s Eve, the controversial Act has been roundly criticized as unconstitutional by groups on both the political left and right. Of greatest concern was Section 1021, which grants the United States military authority to exercise police powers on American soil. Upon order of the president and at his sole discretion, agents of the military are empowered to detain “until the end of hostilities” anyone the president believes to have “substantially supported” al Qaeda, the Taliban, or “associated forces.”"

    found: Judge strikes down NDAA, rules Obama must obey Constitution
    • We sleep safely in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would harm us.
    - George Orwell Military


  2. #2
    VIP Member Array Badey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    3,149
    It is getting scary out there... We just lost our 1A rights wherever the secret service is present too... I hope the courts strike that down as well.
    garyacman likes this.
    Though defensive violence will always be a sad necessity in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men -St. Augustine

  3. #3
    Member Array Justified's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    423
    I don't understand why these stories are not discussed more!?!? The stripping away of our constitutional rights is far more important and interesting than 90% of what is on the news.
    • We sleep safely in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would harm us.
    - George Orwell Military

  4. #4
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,942
    Quote Originally Posted by Badey View Post
    It is getting scary out there... We just lost our 1A rights wherever the secret service is present too... I hope the courts strike that down as well.
    That ain't going to happen anytime soon. I beleive you are talking about USC Title 18, Section 871, which was established in 1917, prohibiting threats against the president or a successor.

  5. #5
    Guest Array Guest1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    home-astan(FINALLY)
    Posts
    1,125
    H.R.347,O just signed into law,no protesting within hearing distance of S.S.agents.for anyone that has ever been to an event with S.S.protection,this can extend out to 800 meters.
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    That ain't going to happen anytime soon. I beleive you are talking about USC Title 18, Section 871, which was established in 1917, prohibiting threats against the president or a successor.

  6. #6
    VIP Member Array Sig 210's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Southwestern OK
    Posts
    2,017
    Its all about political trash in an election year. Yep, lets all blame Obama for signing a bill that contains putrid stuff his opponents in the US congress inserted. Far out US senators Inhofe and Sessions inserted a poison pill into the NDAA . This was an attempt to force a veto of the defense appropriations bill and score political points by claiming Obasma is "weak on defense".


    The presidents signing statement:

    Statement by the President on H.R. 1540 | The White House


    More:

    Defense Bill Would Make America A Battlefield | Disinformation

    The dumb Okie voters will continue to vote for the Inhofe idiot until he croaks.

  7. #7
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,942
    Quote Originally Posted by glockrocker View Post
    H.R.347,O just signed into law,no protesting within hearing distance of S.S.agents.for anyone that has ever been to an event with S.S.protection,this can extend out to 800 meters.
    I just read the text of the origianl law and the one just signed(they both suck so don't get me wrong). But where does it say about 800 meters and hearing distance? The new bill is almost identical to the original except some wording which is significant

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

judge strikes down ndaa

,

obama strikes down ndaa

Click on a term to search for related topics.