S.1867 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012

An original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2012 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes. view all titles (9)

All Bill Titles

  • Official: An original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2012 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Short: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 as introduced.
  • Short: Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 as introduced.
  • Short: Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 as reported to senate.
  • Short: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 as reported to senate.
  • Short: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 as passed senate.
  • Short: Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 as passed senate.
  • Short: National Guard Empowerment and State-National Defense Integration Act of 2011 as passed senate.
  • Short: SBIR/STTR Reauthorization Act of 2011 as passed senate.

This Bill currently has no wiki content. If you would like to create a wiki entry for this bill, please Login, and then select the wiki tab to create it.

Comments Feed

Displaying 31-47 of 47 total comments.

constituent0456 12/09/2011 1:42am

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/05/peru-state-of-emergency-protests-mine?cid=nlc-dailybrief-daily_news_brief-link21-20111205

Here is how it looks when we do it in Peru….Just sayin’.

amusedandannoyed 12/12/2011 2:31am
in reply to amusedandannoyed Dec 12, 2011 2:27am

I also want to know if food canning and keeping food in your freezer is still legal with this bill.

toray99 11/30/2011 5:58am

“One section of these provisions, section 1031, would be interpreted as allowing the military to capture and indefinitely detain American citizens on U.S. soil. Section 1031 essentially repeals the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 by authorizing the U.S. military to perform law enforcement functions on American soil. That alone should alarm my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, but there are other problems with these provisions that must be resolved,” Colorado Senator Mark Udall said in a speech earlier this month.
Following an ACLU alert on the legislation, some pointed out that the text of the bill actually exempts Americans from being detained under the new “homeland battlefield” designation under the proviso that “the requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.”

WasMiddleClass 11/30/2011 10:53pm
in reply to WasMiddleClass Nov 30, 2011 10:45pm

Obama Signs ‘Plain Writing’ Law

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/obama-signs-law-understand/story?id=11902841#.Ttb57ogZZZM

WasMiddleClass 11/30/2011 10:46pm

Read the Military Detention Bill

http://www.opencongress.org/articles/view/2438-Read-the-Military-Detention-Bill-

stidmatt 12/16/2011 2:55am

You can’t trust the mass media on this bill. They’ve all been lying about it. Read the official government summary and if you have questions on a section you need to check it out. All of the mass media that doesn’t show their quotes and sources have betrayed this country. Don’t fall for them the way I did on this one.

glyoko 12/29/2011 11:57am
in reply to malymisiek Nov 28, 2011 9:15am

15 (b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS
16 AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—
17 (1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The require
18 ment to detain a person in military custody under
19 this section does not extend to citizens of the United
20 States.
21 (2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—The require
22 ment to detain a person in military custody under
23 this section does not extend to a lawful resident
24 alien of the United States on the basis of conduct
25 taking place within the United States, except to the

page 363

1 extent permitted by the Constitution of the United
2 States.

Note that this doesn’t forbid the military from detaining US citizens, it instead only makes it so that the military doesn’t have to detain US citizens. It says nothing about the military not being allowed to indefinitely detain US citizens, except that they can choose not to. The language here is tricky.

toolib 12/26/2011 6:00pm
in reply to jongaskell Nov 27, 2011 1:18pm

@jongaskell,

The scope of Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) has not been limited since the Patriot Act. This means U.S. citizens can fall under section 1031. Go read the updated comments and find out how others interpret the language.

The quote “Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand authority…” does not explicitly say — U.S. citizens are not subject to this bill! Because they absolutely are subject to military force under the Patriot Act, and they are currently, they will be in the future.

You have to take the whole bill into context, and read the comments by other people to get a clear picture about what this bill is saying:
“You will be detained if you aid al-Qaeda, even if you’re an American (Sec. 1031). There will be no trial by jury, and you will only have access to military counsel (Sec. 1035). The penalty is death (Sec. 1037).”

MontanaGirl 12/03/2011 9:56pm
in reply to brianlarsen45 Nov 30, 2011 10:40am

1031 (e) AUTHORITIES.—Nothing in this section shall be
construed to affect existing law or authorities, relating to
the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident
aliens of the United States or any other persons who are
captured or arrested in the United States.

jewsuslives 12/03/2011 11:19pm

It doesn’t matter how the bill defines a “covered person”, if there is no judicial review, then definitions don’t matter. This bill is a death blow to the American republic. If it passes, I fully expect political assassinations and a military coup in the US by 2030.

michtu 12/05/2011 11:25pm
in reply to adipesh Dec 05, 2011 12:16pm

I wondered that too but found this link http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s1867pcs/pdf/BILLS-112s1867pcs.pdf.

adipesh 12/05/2011 12:16pm

I’m sorry, but I can’t find the link to the full text of this bill. why is it not showing up on the main bill page?

jdeutenberg 12/05/2011 12:11am

Today, thanks to all of you, the sun has begun to set on our republic. Once the bill gets passed into law(and it will), the floodgates allowing the misuse of power by law enforcement officials. Abuse brutality and death of the Sovereign Citizens of this nation will surely follow on a scale no less appalling than genocide. You have unanimously begun the dissolution of the principles the founding fathers gave their lives for. You have usurped, defiled and committed an act of terror against we the people .
ALL OF YOU SHOULD BE INCARCERATED, WITHOUT FORMALLY BEING CHARGED, DENIED THE RIGHT FOR A SPEEDY TRIAL AND EXECUTED FOR GRAND TREASON AND SEDITION using the provisions set forth by senate bill 1867. We the people would like to make a citizen’s arrest against the progenitor’s of Fascism, Our Elected Officials!

Tokishone 12/08/2011 9:53pm

I am thoroughly scared at this point….
If they are given the ability to arrest ANYONE suspected of terrorism, with out fair trial, things are going to get ugly… Plus, there is a reason they are now making FEMA camps available for use…. It’s the end of our beautiful country… it’s the end, and it’s coming fast…

WasMiddleClass 12/07/2011 6:48pm

I have been trying to come up with some fitting words for this anniversary of Peal Harbor.

I can not come up with any better than these from a Pear Harbor survivor.

“Freedom is never free, It looks like it never will be”

constituent0456 12/08/2011 7:02pm

Sections 1031 thru 1047 do not belong in an appropriations bill. They grant new powers to the Pres/DOD and address legal rights of “unpriviledged enemy belligerents” subject to arrest or currently detained.
Section 1245 is equally dangerous! It allows sanctions to be imposed on Iran and it’s central bank. It gives powers to the Pres to carry out foreign policy up to and including the seizing of monies from national and international entities determined to have financial interests in Iran, and allows for broader powers to be used to sanction the purchase of Iranian oil by foreign interests if the Pres deems others sources to be readily available, at a comparable price. The report used to base such a sweeping squeeze on global oil markets (by way of limiting the activities of central banks across the globe) was published only ten days before this policy was written into this appropriations bill. Can this be our best response? Shouldn’t such a policy be open to debate before enactment?

amusedandannoyed 12/12/2011 2:27am

“Lindsey Graham, R-SC, stated that the ’battlefield has been extended to U.S. soil.” found on: http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-national/detainee-bill-raises-serious-constitutional-questions

Does this mean that this bill makes all U.S. military personnel Federal tax exempt whether or not they are deployed overseas?


Vote on This Bill

3% Users Support Bill

20 in favor / 654 opposed
 

Send Your Senator a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments