Judge Strikes Down NDAA, Rules Obama Must Obey Constitution

President Obama face WH photo SC Judge strikes down NDAA, rules Obama must obey Constitution

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.”

Judge Forrest concluded that the Section “…failed to ‘pass Constitutional muster’ because its broad language could be used to quash political dissent.” In a statement clearly directed to lawmakers, she added,   ”Section 1021 tries to do too much with too little – it lacks the minimal requirements of definition and scienter that could easily have been added, or could be added, to allow it to pass constitutional muster.” That is, Congress failed—perhaps deliberately– to define “substantial support” of terrorist groups or describe those activities which might be construed as crossing the legal line. And no law may be enforced if those to whom it applies are unable to clearly understand what a violation of that law entails.

Nothing could more plainly reveal the rank corruption and lust for power of the Manchurian Candidate than his involvement in crafting and then misrepresenting the final text and authority of the NDAA. According to Democrat Senator Carl Levin, it was Obama himself who demanded American citizens be included under the detention law and that the President have exclusive authority to invoke the statute. “The language which precluded the application of Section [1021] to American citizens was in the bill that we originally approved…and the administration asked us to remove the language which says that U.S. citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section,” said Levin after the NDAA was signed into law.

Yet in his signing statement, Obama wrote that he had in fact forced Congress to “…[revise] provisions that otherwise would have jeopardized the safety, security and liberty of the American people.” So rather than the grand inquisitor, committing to prison any American citizens he chose to view as enemies, Obama claimed to be their champion and savior, protecting them from the excesses of an over-zealous Congress!

“I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens,” wrote Obama. “My Administration will interpret section 1021 in a manner that ensures that any detention it authorizes complies with the Constitution, the laws of war, and all other applicable law.” This of course was an outright lie, given the expressed meaning of the statute as Obama himself had demanded it be written. Leave it to Barack Obama to demand he be given absolute authority over the American public, yet claim in the next moment that he will not take advantage of it!

The Department of Justice, which defended the NDAA before Judge Forrest, will undoubtedly appeal her ruling. It is a judicial process Americans must watch closely as the free exercise of our Constitutional rights depends upon the outcome.

No related posts.

"Loophole" from Obama's IRS: Protect your IRA or 401(k) with gold and silver... click here to get a NO-COST Info Guide >

Comments

  1. sean murry says:

    A good start now he needs to be tried for treason.

  2. Kenneth says:

    WOW…..at least one sane federal judge was located. Sure hope there are more like her in the next step of the appeal. Most federal judges are afraid to rule against Obama….retaliation, etal.

  3. tex1952 says:

    I believe there are many more Constitution loving Americans than we think. I also believe that we are the MAJORITY. As far as the sanity of Fed judges…. we know there is 2 or 3, but the rest are suspect.
    Tried for treason by the STATES, NOT IN A FEDERAL COURT. The sentence must also be carried out by the STATES.

  4. (in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

    I love this word. Finally, a word to describe our current political situation.

  5. Devasahayam says:

    Given that 0bama himself is unconstitutional and abominable, any surprise that everything done by him so far is?

  6. Why did no major news carry this story?

  7. David F. says:

    This is the "Transparency" Obama promised in 2008…he says one thing but does the exact opposite thing behind closed doors. He is such a great guy, we should reward him with a 3×9 foot steel cell with a Golden crapper for all his "Legislative" and "Executive Order" needs.

    • Iftruthbeknown says:

      In a way he IS transparent. If we just believe the opposite of everything he says, we'll know his real agenda, always.

  8. Seeks_the_truth says:

    Give me full power of the American people, but I'll swear (on the Bible if I have to) that I will never take advantage of them.

    And I have some oceanfront property in Arizona for sale…

  9. ProundPatriotToo says:

    Thank God for this women. Apparently, we still have a few honest and loyal Constitutional Judges that stand guard for American citizens. Bless her. Vote in November and be resolved that we, the true patriots of this country, will not falter from the wall as true Constitutional sentinels.

  10. What right has any judge to say obama dont have to obey our constitution, nobody is above our laws, someone ought to tell that judge that.

    • Iftruthbeknown says:

      Did you not understand the article? This judge is saying that Obama is NOT above our Constitution. She never said that he didn't have to obey the Constitution. Not obeying the Constitution is what Obama wanted to do. But this judge is making him obey it. Now Obama's henchmen will appeal her decision and try to get it overthrown so that Obama doesn't have to obey the Constitution.

  11. Patriot1 says:

    Thank you Judge Forrest. Now she must be one of the few sane and competent Judges left.

  12. James Hay says:

    Though I Am Very Appreciative Of Judge Foster's Vigilence In Protecting And Defending The Constitution In Which Our Elected Represenatives In Congress Has Neglected And Abandoned Altogether I Retain My Skepticism That Other Federal Judges Will Have The Courage To Follow Judge Foster's Lead And Submit To Their Solemn Oaths Of Office And To The Provisions Of The Constitution As Well As The Rule Of Law By Affirming Judge Foster's Ruling Which Nullifies One Of Many Obama's Illegal Act As President Of The United States.

  13. michael says:

    What is this impostor still doing sitting in the White House. Congress do your job and get rid of this evil fraud.

  14. If Obscumbo-Dinga is illegal he has no right s — except to a high security cell for life

Speak Your Mind

*