These questions are culled from phone calls, letters, faxes and e-mails sent to Rep. Gallegly's Camarillo, Solvang, and Washington offices. Each week Rep. Gallegly adds another question and answer. Please add your comments.
December 16, 2011
Question: Is it true that H.R. 1540, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, would allow for the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens by the U.S. military?
Answer: H.R. 1540 does not allow for the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens by the military. It reaffirms the military’s existing authority to detain individuals captured in the course of hostilities conducted pursuant to the Authorization for the Use of Military Force.
It also codifies into federal law, including U.S. Supreme Court decisions, how military combatants are treated. Nothing in the legislation may be construed to change existing law relating to the detention of United States citizens or lawful residents who are captured or arrested in the United States.
In cases in which a foreign terrorist is caught in a plot to attack the U.S. (such as the Christmas Day Bomber), H.R. 1540 does establish a new requirement for military custody. However, this provision only applies to individuals who are part of Al Qaeda or another terrorist organization and have participated in planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States. U.S. citizens and lawful resident aliens of the United States are explicitly exempted from this provision.
It is vital that terrorists bent on waging war against Americans are treated according to the laws of war, not treated like simple criminals. H.R. 1540 assures that the Department of Defense will be a more efficient steward of the taxpayer dollar while ensuring that as we fight terrorists around the world, we also protect the civil liberties of Americans at home.
For more information on my positions on Terrorism issues, please see my Key Issue: Terrorism page.
For previous Questions of the Week chronologically and by topic, please see my Questions of the Week page.
The relevant part I believe is this:
"SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.
(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.
(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States."
I was one of the people to call Rep. Gallegly. I do not believe this was in earlier versions of the bill. I'm happy to see it included in the most recent version.