Supreme Court refuses to stop indefinite detention of Americans under NDAA

[ferrous]

[url]http://rt.com/usa/156172-scotus-ndaa-hedges-obama/[/url]
[QUOTE]The United States Supreme Court this week effectively ended all efforts to overturn a controversial 2012 law that grants the government the power to indefinitely detain American citizens without due process.On Monday, the high court said it won’t weigh in on challenge filed by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Chris Hedges and a bevy of co-plaintiffs against US President Barack Obama, ending for now a two-and-a-half-year debate concerning part of an annual Pentagon spending bill that since 2012 has granted the White House the ability to indefinitely detain people [I]"who are part of or substantially support Al-Qaeda, the Taliban or associated forces engaged in hostilities against the United States.”[/I]

The Obama administration has long maintained that the provision — Section 1021(b)(2) of the[URL="http://rt.com/trends/national-defense-authorization-act-indefinite-detention/"]National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012[/URL] — merely reaffirmed verbiage contained within the Authorization for Use of Military Force, or AUMF, signed by then-President George W. Bush in the immediate aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Opponents, however, argued that the language in Section 1021 of the NDAA is overly vague and could be interpreted in a way that allows for the government to detain without trial any American citizen accused of committing a “[I]belligerent act[/I]” against the country “[I]until the end of hostilities[/I].” [/QUOTE]

[LoganIsAwesome]

Sack our supreme court pls

[catbarf]

I'm glad you chose such an unbiased and informative source as Russia Today.

[quote]SCOTUS declined to make any comment regarding the case on Monday, but rather simply said that it would not be considered by the high court. [/quote]

In other words, the Supreme Court doesn't want to get involved [I]yet[/I] and is instead defaulting to the ruling of a federal appeals court, which overruled a district court. It's not up to the Supreme Court to get involved in every case, especially when it's over a purely theoretical issue that has yet to come up in an actual trial. The point of the Supreme Court is to make interpretations of laws and how they apply to individual trials, setting precedents, not to overrule every lower court on every possible future issue of interpretation.

RT is instead phrasing it as the Supreme Court giving a thumbs-up to the Obama administration to start shipping people to Guantanamo, which is bullshit.

[Killer900]

I thought we weren't allowed to post from RT.

[LZTYBRN]

[QUOTE=LoganIsAwesome;44696823]Sack our supreme court pls[/QUOTE]

sack our entire government pls

[JgcxCub]

I don't understand why RT is disallowed yet Daily Mail is let through

[ferrous]

[QUOTE=JgcxCub;44697035]I don't understand why RT is disallowed yet Daily Mail is let through[/QUOTE]

Which mod said it isn't?

[Killer900]

[QUOTE=JgcxCub;44697035]I don't understand why RT is disallowed yet Daily Mail is let through[/QUOTE]RT is propaganda and DM is a tabloid, they really shouldn't be allowed.