House passes NDAA with funding of military
The House of Representatives passed the Fiscal Year 2015 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Of the 100 or so amendments that lawmakers attempted to add to the legislation, two — one approved and one rejected — went nearly unnoticed, these reportedly were designed to attempt to force the federal government to adhere to core constitutional principles.
First, there was the unsuccessful attempt by Representative Adam Smith (D-Wash.) to “eliminate indefinite detention in the United States and its territories.” The amendment benefited from bipartisan sponsorship (it was cosponsored by Georgia Republican Paul Broun) but was ultimately defeated by a vote of 191-230.
The New American notes “a key component of the NDAA mandates a frightening grant of immense and unconstitutional power to the executive branch. Under the provisions of Section 1021 the president is afforded the absolute power to arrest and detain citizens of the United States without their being informed of any criminal charges, without a trial on the merits of those charges, and without a scintilla of the due process safeguards protected by the Constitution of the United States.”
The Politico notes that the White House is not supportive of the measure: “The $601 billion measure, which sets defense spending next fiscal year at levels agreed to under December’s bipartisan budget deal, rejects a number of proposals put forward by the Pentagon to rein in its own spending, from base closures to troop benefits cuts to the retirement of the Air Force’s A-10 Warthog attack jets.”
Rand Paul attempts to explain his vote:
This bill also isn’t about indefinite detention. This year’s bill did not contain the authorization for indefinite detention.
That provision was in last year’s NDAA bill.
The bill this year contained the amendment I supported which sharply limited the detention power, and eliminated it entirely for American citizens in the US. While it is only a partial victory, it was a big victory. Particularly compared to what passed last year. Even so, I will continue to fight to protect anyone who could possibly be indefinitely detained.
Justin Amash responded on Facebook:
Senator Rand Paul is correct in his description of the 2013 NDAA. It’s the 2012 NDAA (not 2013) that authorizes indefinite detention without charge or trial. There’s much more to be done to protect our rights and undo the harm of the 2012 NDAA (which doesn’t expire), but thanks to the efforts of United States Senator Mike Lee and Sen. Paul, we are making significant progress in (re-)advancing the principle that all people in the United States have a constitutionally protected right to full due process.
Politico has more on the coverage HERE