Loss of Liberty: Detaining Americans Without Trial

The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides, "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence." The Fifth Amendment provides in part that citizens of the United States cannot "be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." These amendments on their most basic level mean that every citizen is entitled to a speedy trial before the government can take away their liberty and detain them in prison. This is a basic principle of being a citizen of the United States.

However, if both houses of Congress have their way, both Republicans and Democrats, many US citizens will be denied these basic Constitutional rights. The worst part, nobody seems to care.

Denying Americans a fair trial before detention is not a new concept in America. It has been tried over and over again. In recent years, the war on terrorism has raised issues regarding whether Americans who are found to be helping terrorists are entitled to a trial before being detained indefinitely.

However, as America moves farther and farther away from September 11, 2001, these debates do not occur as much in public. But this does not mean that Americans are not still subject to the rules created after 911. The most recent debate in the US Senate shows that this debate still is alive, even though CNN and Fox News never mention it. The US National Defense Authorization Act has passed both the House and the Senate, by wide margins, and is ready for the President's signature or veto. President Obama has already threatened to veto the Appropriations bill if it contained the provision that took a trial away from American citizens.

The Senate debate on the bill was a strange ordeal. Both Democrats and Republicans stood in favor of the bill that was co-sponsored by Senators McCain and Levin, a Republican and Democrat. Lindsey Graham, a conservative Republican from South Carolina stated, "If you’re an American citizen and you betray your country, you’re not going to be given a lawyer ... I believe our military should be deeply involved in fighting these guys at home or abroad." Other members stood and proudly made similar statements. The very essence of the provisions is that the military shall have the discretion to determine who is a "terrorist" as that term is defined who fought against the United States in battle with the battlefield being defined as abroad and at home. Simply put, if the government believes that you are working against the United States, you can be detained without a trial, without a lawyer, without due process, indefinitely.

Of course the bill provisions do not flat out say that Americans can be detained without a trial. One has to read the bill, and most importantly its definitions, and understand how those definitions have been used by the military and executive branch in the last decade to understand how American citizens will have their rights taken away simply because someone in the military thinks they should be taken away.

The Declaration of Independence states as one of the grievances against King George was "For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of a Trial by Jury." Seriously, how far off the reservation has this nation gone when this long held principle and one of the very reasons for the existence of the United States is now being simply swept away with a large majority vote in both houses of Congress. Where is the outrage?

President Obama has stated that he will veto the bill if it contained this provision. We shall see. An election year is coming up and oddly if he does follow through and veto this bill he will be labeled by many as un-American because he will be vetoing a defense appropriation bill. But, more importantly, if the President cedes to the will of Congress, he will be signing a bill that facially is unconstitutional but he will be applauded by the majority of Congress. These are strange times indeed as Rand Paul, the most conservative Senator, and the ACLU are both vocally against this bill. Seriously, will someone explain this? How can this provision that directly limits an American's rights not cause the Tea Party to Occupy Congress and beat the members over the head with old copies of the Constitution.

Yes, jury trials are slow and imperfect. Yes, we give rights to people that nobody else in the world gives. Yes, it is hard. But here is the truth: IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE HARD. Being a self governing people with advanced citizenship is supposed to be hard. If it were easy, everyone would do it. But we the people are simply giving up the very principles we were founded upon without any fight. The Occupy movement is not being allowed to peacefully assemble anymore. Voters are disenfranchised all over the Country. And Americans are about to be denied a trial. How are members of Congress who supported such a bill not be guilty of treason? I simply do not understand.

President Obama signed the bill. Sickening.