"Fy 2011 National Defense Authorization Act." International Debates 10.1 (2012): 22. Academic Search Premier. Web. 13 Mar. 2012.
This source more or less details the specific conditions of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) itself. This is an article that can act as reference if needed to point out a specific portion of the document. However, this source does show some bias in favor of the NDAA. The article states that the act reaffirms the United States’ ability to lawfully detain those associated with Al-Qaeda, Taliban or any other combatant of the United States, without extending their authority to detain American citizens. This shows that writers of this article do not believe that the act harms the individual liberties of Americans.
542 U.S. 507; 124 S. Ct. 2633; 159 L. Ed. 2d 578; 2004 U.S. LEXIS 4761; 72 U.S.L.W. 4607; 2004 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 486. LexisNexis Academic. Web. Date Accessed: 2012/03/13.
This source cites the Supreme Court case, Hamdi vs. Rumsfeld that took place from April 28th, 2004 to June 28th, 2004. In this case the defendant, an American citizen named Yaser Hamdi, was detained in Afghanistan and brought to the United States under the suspicion that he was a member of the Taliban. Upon detention, Hamdi received no due process, with the military citing the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) to defend their action. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Mr. Hamdi stating that as a citizen willing to challenge the accusation that he was a terrorist, he was entitled to being given factual basis for his arrest and an opportunity the refute the claims against him.
No comments:
Post a Comment