CHRIS HEDGES UPDATE 17 Sep: An Historic Repudiation of Government Overreach (ACTION)

Just in Monday 9/17/2012:
Chris Hedges on His NDAA Victory
"We Won—For Now" -- In January I sued President Barack Obama for authorizing the military to detain U.S. citizens indefinitely. U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest, in short, just declared the law unconstitutional. Plz read the full comment by Hedges URGENTLY if you are
a follower/activist of human rights or even if you aren't. And plz read the 112 page ruling.
And that’s why President Obama and Congress should change course and work together to repeal the detention provisions in the NDAA—Sections 1021 and 1022—and ensure that anyone accused of a crime is charged and fairly tried, or released. If you agree, then let your Senators know— they’ll be working on the 2013 NDAA later this year: www.amnestyusa.org/ndaa SEE UPDATE just in from CHRIS HEDGES but first FIND THE RULING BY JUDGE KATHERINE FORREST CLICK here

We ALL need to do this -- our nation, our legacy and our world is at stake.

here

==============
UPDATING: Media sources & right groups are reporting on this breaking news -- see the number of folk who agree with Judge Katherine B. Forrest's May and recent rulings (an invisible majority?) Judge Forrest is evidently an Obama appointee who nevertheless sees the illegality of much of our current administration's choices.

Indefinite detention - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia GO here -- Indefinite detention is the incarceration of an arrested person by a national government or law enforcement agency without a trial. It is a controversial practice.

Look for some great explication and commentary soon from Clive Stafford Smith, Andy Worthington, Glenn Greenwald and an array of Civil and Human Rights groups -- more from Amnesty and others. SEE Suggested ACTION at end of this post)

Judge Katherine B. Forrest of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York Blocks Indefinite Detention Law SEE NYTimes article By Charles Savage publ. 12 Sep., 2012 -- CLICK here and read IN FULL on this site below the excerpts.

Summary of article by Charles Savage below:
1) A federal judge on Wednesday (12 Sep, 2012) (who just reaffirmed her May 2012 ruling against indefinite detention) blocked the government from enforcing a controversial statute about the indefinite detention without trial of terrorism suspects. Congress had enacted the measure last year as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

2) The ruling came as the House voted to extend for five years a different statute, the FISA Amendments Act, that expanded the government’s power to conduct surveillance without warrants.

3) In the detention case, Judge Katherine B. Forrest issued a permanent injunction barring the government from relying on the defense authorization law to hold people in indefinite military detention as suspects...at least if they had no connection to the Sept. 11 attacks.

The United States has been detaining ... suspects indefinitely since 2001, relying on an authorization by Congress...Last year, Congress sought to codify such a law -- an overreach -- even extended to American citizens and others arrested on United States soil.

It was challenged by Chris Hedges, a journalist, argued that FISA's existence chilled their constitutional rights by creating a basis to fear that the government might seek to detain them under it by declaring that their activities made them supporters of an enemy group. (In May, Judge Forrest agreed, issuing a preliminary injunction barring the government from relying on the law to detain anyone without trial.)

NOW, on this Wednesday, 12 September,2012, the same Judge Forrest made that injunction permanent in a 112-page opinion. The Obama administration fought the move” In an interview, Bruce Afran, an adjunct law professor at Rutgers University who helped represent the plaintiffs, called the ruling a “historic” repudiation of government overreach.

On the other hand, In Congress, the House voted, 301 to 118, to extend the FISA Amendments Act for five years. The law, first enacted in 2008, grew out of a once-secret Bush administration program of warrantless wiretapping. It is set to expire without new legislation at the end of 2012, and the Senate has yet to vote on it.

Republicans overwhelmingly supported the bill — just seven voted against it — while Democrats were split...

Representative Jerrold Nadler, Democrat of New York, said Congress was not performing adequate oversight to protect civil liberties.

“The American people deserve better, and Congress has an obligation to exert more control over spy agencies than simply to give them a blank check for another five years,” he said.

IN FULL:

NOTE: I find this article below by Savage helpful although a bit misleading in implying or actually saying that those the activists so named interview or simply report on or advocate for independently are associating with "terrorists" which is often a misnomer or blanket term used to engender fear among the activists or the general citizen. Nevertheless it's an early and informative article in a large paper with an international reach.)

The New York Times

September 12, 2012
Judge Rules Against Law on Indefinite Detention
By CHARLIE SAVAGE

WASHINGTON — A federal judge on Wednesday blocked the government from enforcing a controversial statute about the indefinite detention without trial of terrorism suspects. Congress enacted the measure last year as part of the National Defense Authorization Act.

The ruling came as the House voted to extend for five years a different statute, the FISA Amendments Act, that expanded the government’s power to conduct surveillance without warrants. Together, the developments made clear that the debate over the balance between national security and civil liberties is still unfolding 11 years after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11.

In the detention case, Judge Katherine B. Forrest of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York issued a permanent injunction barring the government from relying on the defense authorization law to hold people in indefinite military detention on suspicion that they “substantially supported” Al Qaeda or its allies — at least if they had no connection to the Sept. 11 attacks.

The United States has been detaining terrorism suspects indefinitely since 2001, relying on an authorization by Congress to use military force against perpetrators of the Sept. 11 attacks and those who helped them. Last year, Congress decided to create a federal statute that codified authority for such detentions.

The new statute went beyond covering the perpetrators of the Sept. 11 attacks to also cover people who were part of or substantially supported Al Qaeda, the Taliban or associated forces engaged in hostilities against the United States or its allies. Its enactment was controversial in part because lawmakers did not specify what conduct could lead to someone’s being detained, and because it was silent about whether the statute extended to American citizens and others arrested on United States soil.

It was challenged by Chris Hedges, a journalist who interacts with terrorists as part of his reporting, and by several prominent supporters of WikiLeaks. They argued that its existence chilled their constitutional rights by creating a basis to fear that the government might seek to detain them under it by declaring that their activities made them supporters of an enemy group.

In May, Judge Forrest agreed, issuing a preliminary injunction barring the government from relying on the law to detain anyone without trial, and Wednesday she made that injunction permanent in a 112-page opinion.

The Obama administration fought the move, saying the law did not cover free-speech activities. It also claimed that the statute created no new detention authority that did not already exist in the original authorization to use military force. While Judge Forrest said she thought that it did expand detention authority, the fact that the government took the narrower view was “decisive” because it meant that “enjoining the statute will therefore not endanger the public.”

In an interview, Bruce Afran, an adjunct law professor at Rutgers University who helped represent the plaintiffs, called the ruling a “historic” repudiation of government overreach.

“It’s an absolute guarantee of freedom of political debate even in a time of war,” he said.

In Congress, the House voted, 301 to 118, to extend the FISA Amendments Act for five years. The law, first enacted in 2008, grew out of a once-secret Bush administration program of warrantless wiretapping. It is set to expire without new legislation at the end of 2012, and the Senate has yet to vote on it.

Republicans overwhelmingly supported the bill — just seven voted against it — while Democrats were split, with 74 voting for it and 111 voting against it.

Representative Lamar Smith, Republican of Texas, urged the Senate to quickly approve it as well, saying it was needed to protect the country. But Representative Jerrold Nadler, Democrat of New York, said Congress was not performing adequate oversight to protect civil liberties.

“The American people deserve better, and Congress has an obligation to exert more control over spy agencies than simply to give them a blank check for another five years,” he said.

(A version of this article appeared in print on September 13, 2012, on page A21 of the New York edition with the headline: Judge Rules Against Law On Indefinite Detention."

===========
Here's another call for action from DemandProgress.org:

We need your help putting pressure on Obama...Please click here to tell Obama to back off of his support of indefinite detention, and tell your senators to oppose it when it comes up for a vote this fall...It's an egregious violation of the Constitution, a disgusting infringement upon our due process rights, and has already had a chilling effect on activists and journalists. That's why writer Chris Hedges, Noam Chomsky, Tangerine Bolen and four others sued to block it. Shockingly, the Obama administration has consistently supported indefinite detention this year -- signing it into law in the dark of night on New Year's Eve and defending it in court. If we don't do anything, they'll probably keep fighting to protect this law! Click here to tell Obama -- and your senators -- to stop supporting indefinite detention.And please forward this email or use these links to share it with your friends -- Obama will make the decision about an appeal in a matter of days.
THE ACTION here only takes a few moments. GO here

========
RELATED -- many Rights Groups & Experts speak out against recent US Dept of Justice under Holder's recent ruling: GO here