From NPR - Easy to understand breakdown of the new law.

[KyndCulture]

ON DETAINEE LEGAL RIGHTS

The Definition of 'Unlawful Enemy Combatant'
The bill expands the definition of unlawful enemy combatants to include people who have "purposefully and materially supported hostilities" and people who have been declared enemy combatants under Combat Status Review Tribunals, "or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the President or the Secretary of Defense." Under this new language, people in the United States who are not American citizens could be declared unlawful enemy combatants and held indefinitely without trial.

Habeas Corpus
The bill prohibits detainees held by the United States from filing lawsuits challenging their detention, known as habeas corpus pleadings. This wipes out both pending and future lawsuits, and it would apply to people picked up anywhere in the world, including the United States.
The provision is significant. Habeas corpus is an ancient protection that stems from English common law, and its use dates back to as early as the 12th century. In 1969, the Supreme Court called it "the fundamental instrument for safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary and lawless state action." Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) introduced an amendment to remove this part of the legislation. He argued that the ability to challenge one's detention is one of the most fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution. The proposed amendment failed.

ON THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS

Coercive Interrogation Tactics
The bill prohibits "grave breaches" of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. That includes "cruel or inhuman treatment." But many legal analysts and government officials believe the definition of cruel or inhuman treatment as written in the bill does not encompass some of the severe interrogation tactics that the CIA has reportedly used against terrorism suspects. The bill also prohibits enemy combatants from filing lawsuits claiming a violation of their rights under the Geneva Conventions. That could make it difficult to hold accountable those who do engage in torture.

Presidential Power
The bill gives the president the power to "interpret the meaning and application of the Geneva Conventions." Critics fear this means that the president can unilaterally authorize interrogation techniques that many people would consider torture.

War Crimes Act
The legislation would narrow the range of offenses prohibited under the War Crimes Act. This would protect civilians (such as CIA interrogators and White House officials) from being prosecuted for committing acts that would have been considered war crimes under the old definition. The change is retroactive to 1997, which means any crimes committed since 1997 would be prosecuted under the new standard, not the old one.

ON MILITARY COMMISSIONS

Evidence Obtained Through Coercion
If an enemy combatant made a statement under coercion before Congress passed the Detainee Treatment Act in 2005, the evidence is admissible at a military tribunal in most cases. If the statements were made after Congress passed the 2005 ban on coercive interrogation tactics, the evidence is admissible only if a military judge finds that "the interrogation methods used to obtain the statement do not violate the cruel, unusual, or inhumane treatment or punishment prohibited by the Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution."

Secret Evidence
The first draft of this legislation said that defendants could "examine and respond" to all of the evidence against them at a military tribunal. Now it says only that defendants can "respond" to all evidence. The full implications of this phrase aren't entirely clear. Defense lawyers will likely argue that defendants can't respond to evidence they haven't been able to examine.

Hearsay Evidence
Hearsay evidence is generally acceptable at military tribunals. A judge has to rule that the evidence is reliable and relevant to the trial.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6161223

[KyndCulture]

1. kick for the person who asked for this earlier.

I lost that thread.

[G_j]

2. The bill gives the president the power to

The bill gives the president the power to "interpret the meaning and application of the Geneva Conventions"


To say it again, people who support this are supporting war crimes, and wouldn't that make them.... how do you say? "war criminals"?

[KyndCulture]

3. damn skippy it would.

The full throttle of this law hasn't sunk in yet...

but the more I read, the more I wanna open this bottle of wine at 11am.

[G_j]

4. yup

got an extra glass?



this is sooo f*$%#ing depressing

[BlueEyedSon]

14. make mine bourbon

:cry:

[SnoopDog]

5. The first definition is not complete - Unlawful Enemy Combatant

It pertains to each and every American citizen...

How does everybody feel now about our democracy...?

[Supersedeas]

15. With Rummi authorized to appoint a 'tribunal' to certify the enemy label

[Pawel K]

6. This is scary, could apply to people like me

I was born in Poland but I have lived here since I was 8 years old, over 14 years. All my family is here but technically I am not yet a citizen, I am still a resident. Under this law they can lock me up and nobody would even know what happened to me.

This country is heading down the shitter quickly.

[gordianot]

13. Don't worry too much, it can include all American citizens.

Including those who in Mr. Chertoff's words have been radicalized on the internet. Use the internet you may be a terrorist "enemy combatant" in the making. You do not have to go to Afghanistan traing camps.

See link:

http://www.examiner.com/a-160056~Chertoff_calls_for_vigilance_against__homegrown_jihadists_.html

[AllegroRondo]

20. As Senator Kucinich pointed out

'Section 950v., paragraph 26, wrongfully aiding the enemy. Any person subject to this chapter who, in breach of an allegiance or duty to the United States, knowingly and intentionally aids an enemy of the United States, or any of the co-belligerents of the enemy, shall be punished as a military commission under this chapter may direct.'


So, ANYONE who "knowingly aids an enemy" can be declared an enemy combatant. Ordinary citizens like us who speak out against the president and his regime, can be declared as "aiding the enemy" and imprisoned.

[uppityperson]

7. thanks, good summary of a really bad bill

[warrens]

8. I'll save all the kneejerk lefties the time...NPR is a GOP shill

I can never tell if they're serious or FRetards trying to cause dissension. What they are is generally honest journalists.

[hvn_nbr_2]

9. Here's an even simpler breakdown of the new law

Bush can do anything he wants to anybody anywhere in the world any time he wants. Nobody has any recourse or protection from him.

[KyndCulture]

17. Touche' to that.

[anarch]

10. this seems so baldly unconstitutional on several levels...

What the hell? I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, really, but I am. I thought even most of the Republicans would be opposed to something so completely and irrefutably un-American in both letter and spirit.

I suppose a congratulations is in order to the terrorists, since America has now been destroyed, just like they supposedly wanted.

[KyndCulture]

16. Osama can have my freedoms...

I'm not using them anymore.

[NoAmericanTaliban]

11. Thanks. WWJT

Who Would Jesus Torture. What's next - military taking an oath for Bush instead of the constitution.

:mad:

[savemefromdumbya]

12. Roll on Nov 7th

[libodem]

18. this makes me wonder

what about the wives and children the soldiers grab in Iraq to make the husband come back to save them. They wouldn't have any rights as innocents used to lure the people who love them back to be captured. What if they torture wives and children of insurgents in front of them to make them talk? Any way our intelligence officers obtain information or cooperation is fine with this corrupt administration. Being innocent until proven guilty or knowing what you are charged with or why you are being detained ppttfff who cares? Of course all men are not created equal...there are the less thans...you got it the subhumans...the new strain of human species...subhumanus-arabus....caveman think ... must kill the other tribes who compete for resources. We are so highly evolved. I am so proud to be American, so civilized, so cultured, a land of laws and worship for a Deity who approves what ever GWB wants. Secret tribunals, everything classified, hiding the evidence and pictures from the public who must not give a rat's ass what we do to anybody else as long as it's not them. This is like a nightmare that I can't wake up from. Thanks for the rant space. I'm so freaking mad!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Straight Shooter]

19. Hearsay evidence acceptable but defendants can't examine "actual" evidence

That's a double whammy right there.

Someone gets on the witness stand and lies about you. Then your lawyer can't see documents or other tangible evidence that supposedly bolsters what the witness says. Next thing you know, your life is over. You never stood a chance.

BBC had an interesting article on Tokyo Rose yesterday. She was set up. After many years, the witnesses confessed that they were coached and coerced in their testimony against her. Fascinating story. She was a strong woman and eventually prevailed at clearing her name, through a stroke of incidental luck.

The detainees will not have such luck. Our justice system is built upon the premise that it is better to free someone who is guilty than to imprison someone who is innocent. That premise has now been turned upside down. It's completely contrary to American principles embodied in the simple phrase, "with liberty and justice for all."

[Jcrowley]

21. K & R

Among other things, the Act will:

* Strip the US courts of jurisdiction to hear or consider habeas corpus appeals challenging the lawfulness or conditions of detention of anyone held in US custody as an “enemy combatant”. Judicial review of cases would be severely limited. The law would apply retroactively, and thus could result in more than 200 pending appeals filed on behalf of Guantánamo detainees being thrown out of court.

* Permit the executive to convene military commissions to try “alien unlawful enemy combatants”, as determined by the executive under a dangerously broad definition, in trials that would provide foreign nationals so labeled with a lower standard of justice than US citizens accused of the same crimes. This would violate the prohibition on the discriminatory application of fair trial rights.

* Permit the use in military commission trials of evidence extracted under cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

* Give the military commissions the power to hand down death sentences after trials that did not meet international standards.

* Permit the executive to determine who is an “enemy combatant” under any “competent tribunal” established by the executive, and endorse the Combatant Status Review Tribunal (CSRT), the wholly inadequate administrative procedure that has been employed in Guantánamo to review individual detentions.

* Prohibit any person from invoking the Geneva Conventions or their protocols as a source of rights in any action in any US court.

* Narrow the scope of the War Crimes Act by not expressly criminalizing acts that constitute "outrages upon personal dignity, particularly humiliating and degrading treatment" banned under international law. Amnesty International believes that the USA has routinely failed to respect the human dignity of detainees in the "war on terror".

* Endorse the administration’s "war paradigm" – under which the USA has selectively applied the laws of war and rejected international human rights law. The legislation would backdate the "war on terror" to before the 11 September 2001 in order to be able to try individuals in front of military commissions for "war crimes" committed before that date.

[Coexist]

22. "Hearsay evidence is generally acceptable at military tribunals"

So will the kids now be trained to turn in their parents?