or Login to see your representatives.

Access Candidates' and Representatives' Biographies, Voting Records, Interest Group Ratings, Issue Positions, Public Statements, and Campaign Finances

Simply enter your zip code above to get to all of your candidates and representatives, or enter a name. Then, just click on the person you are interested in, and you can navigate to the categories of information we track for them.

Public Statements

Repealing Section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012

Floor Speech

By:
Date:
Location: Washington, DC

Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a very simple piece of legislation: to repeal the infamous section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act, which was quietly signed into law by the President on New Year's Day. What a way to usher in the new year.

Section 1021 essentially codifies into law the very dubious claim of Presidential authority under the 2001 authorization for the use of military force to indefinitely detain American citizens without access to legal representation or due process of law. Section 1021 provides for the possibility of the U.S. military acting as a kind of police force on U.S. soil, apprehending terror suspects, including Americans, and whisking them off to an undisclosed location indefinitely.

No right to attorney.

No right to trial.

No day in court.

This is precisely the kind of egregious distortion of justice that Americans have always ridiculed in so many dictatorships overseas. A great man named Solzhenitsyn became the hero of so many of us when he exposed the Soviet Union's extensive gulag system. Is this really the kind of a United States we want to create in the name of fighting terrorism?

Some have argued that nothing in section 1021 explicitly mandates holding Americans without trial, but it employs vague language, radically expanding the detention authority to include anyone who has ``substantially supported'' certain terrorist groups or ``associated forces.'' No one has defined what those terms mean. What is an ``associated force''?

Sadly, too many of my colleagues are too willing to undermine our Constitution to support such outrageous legislation. One Senator even said about American citizens being picked up under this section of the NDAA, ``When they say, `I want my lawyer,' you tell them, `Shut up. You don't get a lawyer.' '' Is this acceptable in someone who has taken an oath to uphold the Constitution?

Mr. Speaker, of course I recognize how critical it is that we identify and apprehend those who are suspected of plotting attacks against Americans; but why do we have so little faith in our judicial system? Have we not tried in civilian court and won convictions of hundreds of individuals for terrorist or related activities? I fully support continuing to do so, but let us not abandon what is so unique and special about our system of government in the process.

I hope my colleagues will join my effort to overturn this shameful section, 1021, of the National Defense Authorization Act.


Source:
Back to top