CLEARFIELD – TURN Director John Balliet and DuBois resident Beverly Dawes voiced concerns about the broadness and vagueness that lies within two sub-sections of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, which permits the indefinite retention of Americans and others by the military without trial at Tuesday’s regular meeting of the Clearfield County Commissioners.
Dawes also lobbied for the commissioners to pass a resolution, disapproving of the language in Sub-sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 2012. Both she and Balliet wanted these sub-sections clarified, as it pertained to specific provisions, allowing for the indefinite detention of American citizens and the suspension of habeas corpus.
The National Defense Authorization Act is an annual bill passed into law, which allows the government to continue funding national security interests and the military for the next fiscal year. This year, the president’s bill contained provisions that have caused local and state uprisings among citizens who are finding these in violation of their traditional American principals that are to be protected by the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
On Dec. 31, 2011, President Barack Obama signed into law that the writ of habeas corpus is annullable upon the command of the President of the United States. The writ of habeas corpus is a court order that gives a prisoner the right to appear before a judge or magistrate and hear the charges against him or her. It allows the court system to determine if the government has the right to continue detaining the prisoner.
In the law’s detainment sub-sections, the U.S. military is at the president’s disposal for the apprehension and detention of anyone suspected of endangering the “homeland.” Its provisions permit the prisoners to be detained without notification of any criminal charges, without a trial on the legitimacy of their charges and without the safety net of due process that’s guarded by the U.S. Constitution.
More specifically, the law defines these people as “covered persons” and includes people who are accused of certain terror-related offenses. However, it neither exempts U.S. citizens nor legal aliens within a U.S. territory, allowing for anyone to be detained and so charged “without trial until the end of hostilities.” Dawes told the commissioners that these aforementioned provisions appear to be placing all Americans at risk with the law being interpreted as detention without due process.
“It’s the responsibility of Congress and the legislature to write clear language, not ambiguous. It needs to be clear and made simple,” Balliet said. “It’s their duty so that it can be clearly defined by the citizens. “There’s the amount of debate and the different opinions that are surrounding this issue. People all across the spectrum are concerned about it. It can potentially be resolved with very simple, very plain language.”
Commissioner Chairman John A. Sobel said in the board’s research, it discovered split opinions among U.S. lawmakers. For example, he said Republican Senators Lindsey Graham (S.C.) and John McCain (Ariz.) have voiced significant concerns over the president’s new detainment regulations. In addition, he said that Democrat Senator Mark Udall (CO) sought an amendment that would have these provisions removed from the defense bill. Sobel noted all three initially voted in favor of the bill when it was presented at the end of last year.
Sobel said that even the president had issued a statement upon signing the bill in which he wrote about his “serious reservations” concerning the provisions that would be regulating the retention, interrogation and prosecution of suspected terrorists. In his statement dated Dec. 31, 2011, Obama said his administration has consistently opposed such measures insisted by Congress, and he deemed the detainment sub-section as “unnecessary.”
“. . . Moreover, I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a Nation. 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,” Obama wrote at the time.
According to Sobel, the commissioners were approached by citizens in recent weeks and have since discussed the National Defense Authorization Act with U.S. Rep. Glenn Thompson and members of his staff. Thompson is currently preparing an official statement and intends to release it to the media once it’s completed. He advised the commissioners that the law was thoroughly researched and the proper action had been taken by U.S. lawmakers.
Sobel told Dawes and Balliet that the commissioners realize the law’s detainment provisions raise “very important issues” and have stirred controversy nationwide. He said the commissioners felt the government belongs with the people, and they should work vigilantly against the abuse of power. At the same time, he emphasized opinions appeared split, and they respected government leaders on both sides.
He said the commissioners were considering passing the resolution before them but planned to table the issue. Instead, he said the commissioners wanted to facilitate a town hall meeting so that elected officials and “ordinary citizens” could discuss the concerns surrounding the detainment provisions outlined in Sub-sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act.
Sobel said the commissioners would call upon Thompson, seeking his support of the town hall meeting. He said they would also contact U.S. Senators Pat Toomey and Robert Casey Jr. and State Rep. Matt Gabler about participating in the forum. “We do feel this is a very important issue, and we need to take an extra step to open up the lines of communication.”
Initially, Dawes disagreed with the commissioners’ action plan moving forward. She said they were only “kicking the can down the road” by not passing the resolution and subjecting everyone to the “downside” of the detainment provisions. She asked the commissioners if the president decided to detain her in the middle of the night, what Thompson would do about it.
“Nothing,” she said, adding it would start with Clearfield County Sheriff Chester Hawkins, where responsibility lies in this regard at the county level. She told the commissioners she didn’t see any harm in passing the resolution and acknowledging the existing dangers within the National Defense Authorization Act.
“It starts on the county and state levels. The federal government is usurping on the states’ rights. Why let (U.S. Rep.) Glenn Thompson bully you and take away your rights?” she asked. Sobel explained to Dawes that the county was only holding off on passing the resolution until citizens could speak with their elected officials in a town hall meeting.
Commissioner Mark B. McCracken said it wasn’t as though the town hall meeting would be held a year out. He said the commissioners would be looking to organize it within the upcoming weeks. Dawes then said she was in agreement with their actions and offered to facilitate plans for the town hall meeting in any way possible.
“Vague laws equal tremendous abuse, because then it is up to the interpreter,” Dawes said. Commissioner Joan Robinson-McMillen said that’s why it was so important for the board to channel discussions through a town meeting with other people, like Dawes and Balliet, who are just as concerned about this issue.