Appeals Court allows Americans to be detained indefinitely.

Washington, D.C. - A federal appeals judge gave the Obama administration the OK to keep enforcing its indefinite detention policy Tuesday, issuing a temporary stay of a ruling that had found the practice unconstitutional. http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/09/18/stay.pdf

The stay, issued by Judge Raymond Lohier of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, lasts until Sept. 28, when a three-judge appellate panel will hear the case.

U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest, who sits in the Southern District of New York, had ruled against the administration last week, issuing a permanent injunction against section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 on the grounds that it violates the First and Fifth Amendments.

Forrest also denied a stay request, rebuffing the argument of federal lawyers that stopping enforcement of the law does "irreparable harm" to the government.

The law allows the executive branch to hold without trial any person, including Americans, "who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces."

President Barack Obama issued a statement when he signed the National Defense Authorization Act saying he would not hold people without trial and later issued regulations that bar the practice. Yet his Justice Department has vigorously defended the law, filing immediate appeals after each loss in Forrest's court.

U.S. government officials have argued that the provision in the National Defense Authorization Act simply restates existing law on so-called law-of-war detention, at least the law as interpreted by the D.C. Circuit regarding who can be held for providing "substantial support" to Al Qaeda or allied groups. Critics, including journalists and other activists who filed suit over the provision, say they are in fear of being detained for engaging in their regular work.

The legal dispute about whether the law can be blocked turns to a great extent on arcane legal points. The Justice Department claims that even though the provision didn't change existing law, blocking causes irreparable harm because blocking any Congressionally-passed statute does so. Forrest said the government's concession meant there was no urgency to keeping the law enforceable.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/18/indefinite-detention-ban-_n_1893652.html
http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2012/09/appeals-court-unblocks-indefinite-detetnion-law-135815.html?hp=l6