A New York judge has ruled against the government on the issue of indefinite detention under the infamous National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). She said that it violates Constitutional liberties: First Amendment and Fifth Amendment
A group of journalists sued the bipartisan political leaders who ramrodded this law through Congress. They said that the law restricts free speech.
The government went into panic mode as soon as she ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. It argued that the ruling applies only to the journalists who filed the lawsuit. That would have undermined judicial precedent.
She has stood her ground. She has released an 8-page memorandum extending her ruling to anyone under her jurisdiction who is arrested and detained by the government under this section of the NDAA.
If the government appeals this ruling, it might wind up in front of the Supreme Court. The Court might uphold her ruling, thereby making this ruling national in scope.
When she asked the government’s attorney to define the conditions under which journalists could be arrested under the law, he refused to specify. This meant that the law was open-ended.
The judge has now killed the provision in her jurisdiction.
Other judges in other districts may have the courage to do what she did. A precedent has been set.