Judge Strikes Down "Indefinite Detention of US Citizens" Part of NDAA

[mugsy]

The Yahoo article isn't best but it captures the gist of it - I rate this as a win for freedom of US Citizens - note that the part allowing similar detention of non-US citizen terrorists.

http://news.yahoo.com/federal-judge-terror-law-violates-1st-amendment-233222966.html

 

[sanjuro893]

Woo-hoo!!!!!

 

[MarkV]

I remember Lankford telling me that what he voted for didn't allow this. This story must be a ruse.

 

[Glocktogo]

This is a good thing.

 

[mugsy]

This whole issue is very instructive in the basic principles of our form of government.
The Founding Fathers recognized that they were trading some possibility of "efficiency", with our slow ponderous system of checks/balances and limited government, in the hope of preventing the probability that some future government would use more "efficient" powers to suppress liberty.
(For JB) I do not maintain that the Obama Administration would necessarily intend to do any such thing but every time we hand over the power that can allow tyranny we are bringing tyranny one step closer. So my dislike of such laws is not based upon any particular distrust of this present administration. Rather, my objection is based upon my distruct of human nature and the lure of power in mankind in general.

 

[Slack]

...but every time we hand over the power that can allow tyranny we are bringing tyranny one step closer. So my dislike of such laws is not based upon any particular distrust of this present administration. Rather, my objection is based upon my distruct of human nature and the lure of power in mankind in general.

^^^ This

 

[sanjuro893]

This whole issue is very instructive in the basic principles of our form of government.
The founding fathers recognized that they were trading some possibility of "efficiency", with our slow ponderous system of checks/balances and limited government, in the hope of preventing the probability that some future government would use more "efficient" powers to suppress liberty.
(for jb) i do not maintain that the obama administration would necessarily intend to do any such thing but every time we hand over the power that can allow tyranny we are bringing tyranny one step closer. So my dislike of such laws is not based upon any particular distrust of this present administration. Rather, my objection is based upon my distruct of human nature and the lure of power in mankind in general.

amen!!!!!

 

[Mechanicalmehem]

This is very well stated...
--Mech

This whole issue is very instructive in the basic principles of our form of government.
The Founding Fathers recognized that they were trading some possibility of "efficiency", with our slow ponderous system of checks/balances and limited government, in the hope of preventing the probability that some future government would use more "efficient" powers to suppress liberty.
(For JB) I do not maintain that the Obama Administration would necessarily intend to do any such thing but every time we hand over the power that can allow tyranny we are bringing tyranny one step closer. So my dislike of such laws is not based upon any particular distrust of this present administration. Rather, my objection is based upon my distruct of human nature and the lure of power in mankind in general.