Law of the United States
The law of the United States comprises many levels of codified and uncodified forms of law, of which the most important is the United States Constitution, the foundation of the federal government of the United States. The Constitution sets out the boundaries of federal law, which consists of Acts of Congress, treaties ratified by the Senate, regulations promulgated by the executive branch, case law originating from the federal judiciary; the United States Code is the official compilation and codification of general and permanent federal statutory law. Federal law and treaties, so long as they are in accordance with the Constitution, preempt conflicting state and territorial laws in the 50 U. S. in the territories. However, the scope of federal preemption is limited because the scope of federal power is not universal. In the dual-sovereign system of American federalism, states are the plenary sovereigns, each with their own constitution, while the federal sovereign possesses only the limited supreme authority enumerated in the Constitution.
Indeed, states may grant their citizens broader rights than the federal Constitution as long as they do not infringe on any federal constitutional rights. Thus, most U. S. law consists of state law, which can and does vary from one state to the next. At both the federal and state levels, with the exception of the state of Louisiana, the law of the United States is derived from the common law system of English law, in force at the time of the American Revolutionary War. However, American law has diverged from its English ancestor both in terms of substance and procedure, has incorporated a number of civil law innovations. In the United States, the law is derived from five sources: constitutional law, statutory law, administrative regulations, the common law. Where Congress enacts a statute that conflicts with the Constitution, state or federal courts may rule that law to be unconstitutional and declare it invalid. Notably, a statute does not automatically disappear because it has been found unconstitutional.
Many federal and state statutes have remained on the books for decades after they were ruled to be unconstitutional. However, under the principle of stare decisis, no sensible lower court will enforce an unconstitutional statute, any court that does so will be reversed by the Supreme Court. Conversely, any court that refuses to enforce a constitutional statute will risk reversal by the Supreme Court. Commonwealth countries are heirs to the common law legal tradition of English law. Certain practices traditionally allowed under English common law were expressly outlawed by the Constitution, such as bills of attainder.</ref> and general search rrts. As common law courts, U. S. courts have inherited the principle of stare decisis. American judges, like common law judges elsewhere, not only apply the law, they make the law, to the extent that their decisions in the cases before them become precedent for decisions in future cases; the actual substance of English law was formally "received" into the United States in several ways.
First, all U. S. states except Louisiana have enacted "reception statutes" which state that the common law of England is the law of the state to the extent that it is not repugnant to domestic law or indigenous conditions. Some reception statutes impose a specific cutoff date for reception, such as the date of a colony's founding, while others are deliberately vague. Thus, contemporary U. S. courts cite pre-Revolution cases when discussing the evolution of an ancient judge-made common law principle into its modern form, such as the heightened duty of care traditionally imposed upon common carriers. Second, a small number of important British statutes in effect at the time of the Revolution have been independently reenacted by U. S. states. Two examples are the Statute of 13 Elizabeth; such English statutes are still cited in contemporary American cases interpreting their modern American descendants. Despite the presence of reception statutes, much of contemporary American common law has diverged from English common law.
Although the courts of the various Commonwealth nations are influenced by each other's rulings, American courts follow post-Revolution Commonwealth rulings unless there is no American ruling on point, the facts and law at issue are nearly identical, the reasoning is persuasive. Early on, American courts after the Revolution did cite contemporary English cases, because appellate decisions from many American courts were not reported until the mid-19th century. Lawyers and judges used English legal materials to fill the gap. Citations to English decisions disappeared during the 19th century as American courts developed their own principles to resolve the legal problems of the American people; the number of published volumes of American reports soared from eighteen in 1810 to over 8,000 by 1910. By 1879 one of the delegates to the California constitutional convention was complaining: "Now, when we require them to state the reasons for a decision, we do not mean they shall write a hundred pages of detail.
We not mean that they shall include the small cases, impose on the country all this fine judici
A hate crime is a prejudice-motivated crime which occurs when a perpetrator targets a victim because of his or her membership in a certain social group or race. Examples of such groups can include, are exclusively limited to: sex, disability, nationality, physical appearance, gender identity or sexual orientation. Non-criminal actions that are motivated by these reasons are called "bias incidents". "Hate crime" refers to criminal acts which are seen to have been motivated by bias against one or more of the social groups listed above, or by bias against their derivatives. Incidents may involve physical assault, damage to property, harassment, verbal abuse or insults, mate crime or offensive graffiti or letters. A hate crime law is a law intended to deter bias-motivated violence. Hate crime laws are distinct from laws against hate speech: hate crime laws enhance the penalties associated with conduct, criminal under other laws, while hate speech laws criminalize a category of speech. Hate speech laws exist in many countries.
In the United States, hate crime laws have been upheld by both the Supreme Court and lower courts in the case of'fighting' words and other violent speech, but they are thought by some people to be in conflict with the First Amendment right to freedom of speech, but hate crimes are only regulated through threats of injury or death. The term "hate crime" came into common usage in the United States during the 1980s, but it is used retrospectively in order to describe events which occurred prior to that era. From the Roman persecution of Christians to the Nazi slaughter of Jews, hate crimes were committed by both individuals and governments long before the term was used. A major part of defining a crime as a hate crime is that it is directed toward a oppressed group; as Europeans began to colonize the world from the 16th century onwards, indigenous peoples in the colonized areas, such as Native Americans became the targets of bias-motivated intimidation and violence. During the past two centuries, typical examples of hate crimes in the U.
S. include lynchings of African Americans in the South, lynchings of Mexicans and Chinese in the West. The verb "to lynch" is attributed to the actions of an 18th-century Virginia Quaker. Lynch, other militia officers, justices of the peace rounded up Tory sympathizers who were given a summary trial at an informal court; the term referred to extrajudicial organized but unauthorized punishment of criminals. It evolved to describe execution outside "ordinary justice." It is associated with white suppression of African Americans in the South, periods of weak or nonexistent police authority, as in certain frontier areas of the Old West. Hate crimes can have significant and wide-ranging psychological consequences, not only for their direct victims but for others as well. A 1999 U. S. study of lesbian and gay victims of violent hate crimes documented that they experienced higher levels of psychological distress, including symptoms of depression and anxiety, than lesbian and gay victims of comparable crimes which were not motivated by antigay bias.
A manual issued by the Attorney-General of the Province of Ontario in Canada lists the following consequences: Impact on the individual victim psychological and affective disturbances. Effect on the targeted group generalized terror in the group to which the victim belongs, inspiring feelings of vulnerability among its other members, who could be the next hate crime victims. Effect on other vulnerable groups ominous effects on minority groups or on groups that identify themselves with the targeted group when the referred hate is based on an ideology or a doctrine that preaches against several groups. Effect on the community as a whole divisions and factionalism arising in response to hate crimes are damaging to multicultural societies. Hate crime victims can develop depression and psychological trauma. A review of European and American research indicates that terrorist bombings cause Islamophobia and hate crimes to flare up but, in calmer times, they subside again, although to a high level.
Terrorist's most persuasive message is that of fear and fear, a primary and strong emotion, increases risk estimates and has distortive effects on the perception of ordinary Muslims. Widespread Islamophobic prejudice seems to contribute to anti-Muslim hate crimes, but indirectly: terrorist attacks and intensified Islamophobic prejudice serve as a window of opportunity for extremist groups and networks; the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation conducted a study into the motives for hate crimes and found four motives: Thrill-seeking - perpetrators engage in hate crimes for excitement and drama. There is no greater purpose behind the crimes, with victims being vulnerable because they have an ethnic, sexual or gender background that differs from their attackers. While the actual
John William Warner KBE is an American attorney and former politician who served as the United States Secretary of the Navy from 1972 to 1974 and a five-term Republican U. S. Senator from Virginia from 1979 to 2009, he works for the law firm of Hogan Lovells, where he had worked before joining the United States Department of Defense as the Under Secretary of the Navy during the presidency of Richard Nixon in 1969. Warner was the sixth husband of actress Elizabeth Taylor, whom he married before being elected to the Senate, he is a veteran of the Second World War and Korean War, was one of five World War II veterans serving in the Senate at the time of his retirement. He did not seek reelection in 2008. John William Warner was born on February 18, 1927, in Washington, D. C. to John W. and Martha Budd Warner. He grew up in Washington, where he attended the elite St. Albans School before graduating from Woodrow Wilson High School in February 1945, he enlisted in the United States Navy during World War II in January 1945, shortly before his 18th birthday.
He served until the following year. He went to college at Washington and Lee University, where he was a member of Beta Theta Pi, graduating in 1949, he joined the U. S. Marine Corps in October 1950, after the outbreak of the Korean War, served in Korea as a ground aircraft maintenance officer with the 1st Marine Aircraft Wing, he continued in the Marine Corps Reserves after the war reaching the rank of captain. He resumed his studies, taking courses at the George Washington University, before receiving his law degree from UVA in 1953; that year, he became a law clerk to Chief Judge E. Barrett Prettyman of the United States Court of Appeals. In 1956, he became an assistant U. S. attorney. In 1957, Warner married banking heiress Catherine Conover Mellon, the daughter of art collector Paul Mellon and his first wife, Mary Conover, the granddaughter of Andrew Mellon. By his marriage, Warner accrued substantial capital for investing and expanding his political contacts; the Warners, who divorced in 1973, have three children: Virginia, John Jr, Mary.
His former wife now uses the name Catherine Conover. John Warner married actress Elizabeth Taylor on December 4, 1976 at the Second Presbyterian Church in Richmond, Virginia, they divorced on November 7, 1982. On December 15, 2003, Warner married Jeanne Vander Myde, a real estate agent who specializes in Northern Virginia properties, she is the widow of White House official Paul Vander Myde. After giving substantial campaign funds and time to the Nixon Presidential election, on February 1969, Warner was appointed Under Secretary of the Navy under the Nixon Administration. On May 4, 1972, he succeeded John H. Chafee as Secretary of the Navy. Thereafter Warner, was appointed by President Gerald Ford to be a participant in the Law of the Sea talks, negotiated the U. S.-Soviet Incidents at Sea agreement which became a cause célèbre of pro-Détente doves in Soviet-American relations. He was subsequently appointed by Gerald Ford to the post of Director of the American Revolution Bicentennial Administration.
Following Ford's defeat, Warner began to consider political office for himself. He entered politics in the 1978 Virginia election for U. S. Senate. Despite the publicity of being Elizabeth Taylor's husband and the large amounts of money Warner used in his campaign for the nomination, he finished second at the state Republican Party convention to the far more conservative politician Richard D. Obenshain. Much of this loss was due to his perceived liberal political stances his soft approach to Soviet relations. In contrast Obenshain was a noted anti-Soviet, a hardline anti-communist, an opponent of other liberal policies including the Great Society and much of the Civil Rights Movement. However, when Obenshain died two months in a plane crash, Warner was chosen to replace him and narrowly won the general election over Democrat Andrew P. Miller, former Attorney General of Virginia, he was in the Senate until January 3, 2009. Despite his less conservative policy stances, Warner managed to be the second longest-serving senator in Virginia's history, behind only Harry F. Byrd Sr. and by far the longest-serving Republican Senator from the state.
On August 31, 2007, Warner announced that he would not seek re-election in 2008. His committee memberships included the Environment and Public Works Committee, the Senate Committee on Health, Education and Pensions, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; as the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, he protected and increased the flow of billions of dollars into the Virginia economy each year via the state's military installations and shipbuilding firms which served his reelection efforts in every cycle. Warner was quite moderate in comparison to most Republican Senators from the South, he was among the minority of Republicans to support gun control laws. He voted for the Brady Bill and, in 1999, was one of only five Republicans to vote to close the so-called gun show loophole. In 2004 Warner was one of three Republicans to sponsor an amendment by Senator Dianne Feinstein that sought to provide for a 10-year extension of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban. Warner supported the Roe v. Wade decision establishing abortion rights and supported embryonic stem cell research, although he received high ratings from pro-life groups because he voted in favor of many abortion restrictions.
On June 15, 2004, Warner was among the minority of his party to vote to expand hate crime laws to include sexual orientation as a protected category. He supports a
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 is a United States federal law which specifies the budget and policies of the U. S. Department of Defense for fiscal year 2018. Analogous NDAAs have been passed in previous years; the Trump Administration released its fiscal year 2018 budget request on 23 May 2017, requesting $677.1 billion for the federal government's national defense-related activities. $667.6 billion of that amount was for discretionary funding to be provided by an annual appropriations bill. For fiscal year 2018, the cap set by the Budget Control Act of 2011 on discretionary defense spending was $549 billion; the Trump Administration budget request exceeded this cap by $46 billion. H. R. 2810, the version of the NDAA 2018, reported by the House Armed Services Committee, was passed by the House of Representatives on 14 July 2017 in a 344-81 vote. The Senate Armed Services Committee reported its version of S. 1519, on 10 July. The text of S. 1519 was substituted for the House-passed text of H.
R. 2810, Senate passed an amended version of H. R. 2810 on 18 September in an 89-8 vote. President Donald Trump signed the NDAA 2018 on 12 December 2017. Florida congressmen Carlos Curbelo and Patrick Murphy proposed the Foreign Spill Protection bill in 2015 to change the Oil Pollution Act to ensure the costs of foreign oil spills in American waters are incurred by the responsible party; the bill did not pass in the Senate. Curbelo brought back the bill in 2017 with Florida U. S. Representative Darren Soto as the chief cosponsor; the Foreign Spill Protection Act was subsequently passed as a section of the NDAA bill for fiscal year 2018. The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty removes American and Russian ground-launched intermediate-range missiles; the NDAA 2018 includes a $25 million fund for developing a new road-mobile ground-launched cruise missile which would be prohibited by the INF Treaty. The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty Preservation Act of 2017 included within the NDAA 2018 explicitly calls for the establishment of an American missile program which violates the terms of the INF Treaty.
Pentagon spokesman Thomas Crosson stated, "We are prepared to stop such research and development if Russia returns to verifiable compliance with the Treaty." The NDAA included a bill for the Saving Federal Dollars Through Better Use of Government Purchase and Travel Cards Act, proposed by U. S. Senators Chuck Grassley, Tom Carper, Claire McCaskill to crack down on waste and abuse in the spending on travel and purchase cards by federal agencies; the 2018 NDAA included the Modernizing Government Technology Act, which would fund IT modernization projects in the federal government with $250 million each in fiscal 2018 and fiscal 2019. The money is to be held by GSA in a category called the Technology Modernization Fund; the MGT act requires agency CIOs to evaluate applications from within their agencies, if funding is received to report on the projects every six months. The MGT had evolved from proposals by Reps. Will Hurd and Steny Hoyer who had combined efforts in September 2016
Act of Congress
An Act of Congress is a statute enacted by the United States Congress. It can either be a Public Law, relating to the general public, or a Private Law, relating to specific institutions or individuals; the term can be used in other countries with a legislature named "Congress", such as the Congress of the Philippines. In the United States, Acts of Congress are designated as either public laws, relating to the general public, or private laws, relating to specific institutions or individuals. Since 1957, all Acts of Congress have been designated as "Public Law X-Y" or "Private Law X-Y", where X is the number of the Congress and Y refers to the sequential order of the bill. For example, P. L. 111-5 was the fifth enacted public law of the 111th United States Congress. Public laws are often abbreviated as Pub. L. No. X-Y; when the legislation of those two kinds is proposed, it is called public bill and private bill respectively. The word "act", as used in the term "Act of Congress", is a common, not a proper noun.
The capitalization of the word "act" is deprecated by some dictionaries and usage authorities. Some writers, in particular the U. S. Code, capitalize "Act"; this is a result of the more liberal use of capital letters in legal contexts, which has its roots in the 18th century capitalization of all nouns as is seen in the United States Constitution. "Act of Congress" is sometimes used in informal speech to indicate something for which getting permission is burdensome. For example, "It takes an Act of Congress to get a building permit in this town." An Act adopted by simple majorities in both houses of Congress is promulgated, or given the force of law, in one of the following ways: Signature by the President of the United States, Inaction by the President after ten days from reception while the Congress is in session, or Reconsideration by the Congress after a presidential veto during its session. The President promulgates Acts of Congress made by the first two methods. If an Act is made by the third method, the presiding officer of the house that last reconsidered the act promulgates it.
Under the United States Constitution, if the President does not return a bill or resolution to Congress with objections before the time limit expires the bill automatically becomes an Act. In addition, if the President rejects a bill or resolution while the Congress is in session, a two-thirds vote of both houses of the Congress is needed for reconsideration to be successful. Promulgation in the sense of publishing and proclaiming the law is accomplished by the President, or the relevant presiding officer in the case of an overridden veto, delivering the act to the Archivist of the United States. After the Archivist receives the Act, he or she provides for its publication as a slip law and in the United States Statutes at Large. Thereafter, the changes are published in the United States Code. An Act of Congress that violates the Constitution may be declared unconstitutional by the courts; the judicial declaration of an Act's unconstitutionality does not remove the law from the statute books.
However, future publications of the Act are annotated with warnings indicating that the statute is no longer valid law. Legislation List of United States federal legislation for a list of prominent acts of Congress. Procedures of the United States Congress Act of Parliament Coming into force Enactment Federal Register http://bensguide.gpo.gov/6-8/glossary.html
George W. Bush
George Walker Bush is an American politician and businessman who served as the 43rd president of the United States from 2001 to 2009. He had served as the 46th governor of Texas from 1995 to 2000. Bush was born in New Haven and grew up in Texas. After graduating from Yale University in 1968 and Harvard Business School in 1975, he worked in the oil industry. Bush married Laura Welch in 1977 and unsuccessfully ran for the U. S. House of Representatives shortly thereafter, he co-owned the Texas Rangers baseball team before defeating Ann Richards in the 1994 Texas gubernatorial election. Bush was elected President of the United States in 2000 when he defeated Democratic incumbent Vice President Al Gore after a close and controversial win that involved a stopped recount in Florida, he became the fourth person to be elected president while receiving fewer popular votes than his opponent. Bush is a member of a prominent political family and is the eldest son of Barbara and George H. W. Bush, the 41st president of the United States.
He is only the second president to assume the nation's highest office after his father, following the footsteps of John Adams and his son, John Quincy Adams. His brother Jeb Bush, a former Governor of Florida, was a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination in the 2016 presidential election, his paternal grandfather, Prescott Bush, was a U. S. Senator from Connecticut; the September 11 terrorist attacks occurred eight months into Bush's first term. Bush responded with what became known as the Bush Doctrine: launching a "War on Terror", an international military campaign that included the war in Afghanistan in 2001 and the Iraq War in 2003, he signed into law broad tax cuts, the Patriot Act, the No Child Left Behind Act, the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, Medicare prescription drug benefits for seniors, funding for the AIDS relief program known as PEPFAR. His tenure included national debates on immigration, Social Security, electronic surveillance, torture. In the 2004 presidential race, Bush defeated Democratic Senator John Kerry in another close election.
After his re-election, Bush received heated criticism from across the political spectrum for his handling of the Iraq War, Hurricane Katrina, other challenges. Amid this criticism, the Democratic Party regained control of Congress in the 2006 elections. In December 2007, the United States entered its longest post-World War II recession referred to as the "Great Recession", prompting the Bush administration to obtain congressional passage of multiple economic programs intended to preserve the country's financial system. Nationally, Bush was both one of the most popular and unpopular U. S. presidents in history, having received the highest recorded presidential approval ratings in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, as well as one of the lowest approval ratings during the 2008 financial crisis. Bush finished his term in office in 2009 and returned to Texas, where he had purchased a home in Dallas. In 2010, he published Decision Points, his presidential library was opened in 2013. His presidency has been ranked among the worst in historians' polls that were published in the late 2000s and 2010s.
However, his favorability ratings with the public have improved after leaving office. George Walker Bush was born on July 6, 1946, at Yale–New Haven Hospital in New Haven, while his father was a student at Yale, he was his wife, Barbara Pierce. He was raised in Midland and Houston, with four siblings, Neil and Dorothy. Another younger sister, died from leukemia at the age of three in 1953, his grandfather, Prescott Bush, was a U. S. Senator from Connecticut, his father was Ronald Reagan's vice president from 1981 to 1989 and the 41st U. S. president from 1989 to 1993. Bush has English and some German ancestry, along with more distant Dutch, Irish and Scottish roots. Bush attended public schools in Midland, until the family moved to Houston after he had completed seventh grade, he spent two years at The Kinkaid School, a prep school in Piney Point Village in the Houston area. Bush attended high school at Phillips Academy, a boarding school in Andover, where he played baseball and was the head cheerleader during his senior year.
He attended Yale University from 1964 to 1968. During this time, he was a cheerleader and a member of the Delta Kappa Epsilon, serving as the president of the fraternity during his senior year. Bush became a member of the Skull and Bones society as a senior. Bush was a rugby union player and was on Yale's 1st XV, he characterized himself as an average student. His GPA during his first three years at Yale was 77, he had a similar average under a nonnumeric rating system in his final year. In the fall of 1973, Bush entered Harvard Business School, he graduated in 1975 with an MBA degree. He is the only U. S. president to have earned an MBA. Bush was engaged to Cathryn Lee Wolfman in 1967, but the engagement fizzled out. Bush and Wolfman remained on good terms after the end of the relationship. While Bush was at a backyard barbecue in 1977, friends introduced him to Laura Welch, a schoolteacher and librarian. After a three-month courtship, she accepted his marriage proposal and they wed on November 5 of that year.
The couple settled in Texas. Bush left his family's Episcopal Church to join his wife's United Methodist Church. On November 25, 1981, Laura Bush gave birth to fraternal twin daughters and Jenna. Prior to getting married, Bush struggled with multiple episodes of alcohol abuse. In one instance on September 4, 1976, he was pulled over near his fami
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 is a United States federal law which besides other provisions specifies the budget and expenditures of the United States Department of Defense. The bill passed the U. S. House on December 14, 2011, the U. S. Senate on December 15, 2011, was signed into United States law on December 31, 2011, by President Barack Obama; the Act authorizes $662 billion in funding, among other things "for the defense of the United States and its interests abroad". In a signing statement, President Obama described the Act as addressing national security programs, Department of Defense health care costs, counter-terrorism within the United States and abroad, military modernization; the Act imposes new economic sanctions against Iran, commissions appraisals of the military capabilities of countries such as Iran and Russia, refocuses the strategic goals of NATO towards "energy security". The Act increases pay and healthcare costs for military service members and gives governors the ability to request the help of military reservists in the event of a hurricane, flood, terrorist attack, or other disaster.
The most controversial provisions to receive wide attention were contained in subsections 1021–1022 of Title X, Subtitle D, entitled "Counter-Terrorism", authorizing the indefinite military detention of persons the government suspects of involvement in terrorism, including U. S. citizens arrested on American soil. Although the White House and Senate sponsors maintain that the Authorization for Use of Military Force grants presidential authority for indefinite detention, the Act states that Congress "affirms" this authority and makes specific provisions as to the exercise of that authority; the detention provisions of the Act have received critical attention by, among others, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, some media sources which are concerned about the scope of the President's authority, including contentions that those whom they claim may be held indefinitely could include U. S. citizens arrested including arrests by members of the Armed Forces.
The detention powers face legal challenge. The detention sections of the NDAA begin by "affirm" that the authority of the President under the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists, a joint resolution passed in the immediate aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks, includes the power to detain, via the Armed Forces, any person, including a U. S. citizen, "who was part of or supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners", anyone who commits a "belligerent act" against the United States or its coalition allies in aid of such enemy forces, under the law of war, "without trial, until the end of the hostilities authorized by the ". The text authorizes trial by military tribunal, or "transfer to the custody or control of the person's country of origin", or transfer to "any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity". Addressing previous conflicts with the Obama Administration regarding the wording of the Senate text, the Senate–House compromise text, in sub-section 1021 affirms that nothing in the Act "is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force".
The final version of the bill provides, in sub-section, that "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". As reflected in Senate debate over the bill, there is a great deal of controversy over the status of existing law. An amendment to the Act that would have replaced current text with a requirement for executive clarification of detention authorities was rejected by the Senate. According to Senator Carl Levin, "the language which precluded the application of section 1031 to American Citizens was in the bill that we approved in the Armed Services Committee and the Administration asked us to remove the language which says that U. S. citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section". The Senator refers to section 1021 as "1031" because it was section 1031 at the time of his speaking.
All persons arrested and detained according to the provisions of section 1021, including those detained on U. S. soil, whether detained indefinitely or not, are required to be held by the United States Armed Forces. The law affords the option to have U. S. citizens detained by the armed forces but this requirement does not extend to them, as with foreign persons. Lawful resident aliens may or may not be required to be detained by the Armed Forces, "on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States". During debate on the senate floor, Levin stated that "Administration officials reviewed the draft language for this provision and recommended additional changes. We were able to accommodate those recommendations, except for the Administration request that the provision apply only to detainees captured overseas and there's a good reason for that. Here, the difference is modest, because the provision excludes all U. S. citizens. It excludes lawful residents of United States, except to extent permitted by the constitution.
The only covered persons left are those who are illegally in this country or on a tourist visa or other short-term basis. Contrary to some press statements, the detainee provisions in our bill do not include new authority for the permanent detention of suspected terrorists. Rather, the bill uses language provide