Showing posts with label Law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Law. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 2, 2013

California governor signs law defying cooperation with NDAA indefinite detention

End Of Days News

California Gov. Jerry Brown (AFP Photo / Getty Images / Kevork Djansezian)

California Governor Jerry Brown has signed a law barring state cooperation with any attempt by the federal government to indefinitely detain people. The legislation targets the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

Brown signed into law AB351, which goes beyond any other state in rejecting federal indefinite detention power, according to the Tenth Amendment Center. The law reads, in part, “It is the policy of this state to refuse to provide material support for or to participate in any way with the implementation within this state of any federal law that purports to authorize indefinite detention of a person within California.”
 
The NDAA allows the US military to indefinitely detain anyone - sans charges or a trial - on the basis of “national security” concerns. The legislation has drawn a series of legal challenges and attempts in several states to limit its strength.

California’s new law not only targets the NDAA provisions, but also any future federal law that grants officials open-ended detention powers.

Though the NDAA has not been used to date, both administrations of Presidents Obama and George W. Bush have claimed power to detain indefinitely without charge “enemy combatants” caught in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world at Guantanamo Bay and other prisons. More

Thursday, May 16, 2013

Vermont approves assisted suicide bill

End Of Days News

Vermont Gov. Peter Shumlin. (AFP Photo / Alex Wong)

Vermont is about to become the third US state to legalize doctor-assisted suicide. A bill passed by the state legislature will allow physicians to prescribe lethal drugs to terminally ill patients that want to end their life.
State lawmakers on Monday approved the bill, which is now awaiting the signature of Gov. Peter Shumlin, who has already pledged he would sign it. Legalizing assisted suicide “gives Vermonters who are suffering from a terminal illness and anticipating excruciating pain peace of mind in knowing that this is an option,” Shumlin told the Wall Street Journal.
Physician-assisted suicide is already legal in Oregon and Washington, where it was approved through general elections and enacted in 1997 and 2009, respectively. A similar bill failed to garner enough voter support to pass in Massachusetts last November, and was defeated 51 percent to 49 percent. Vermont is the first US state to pass such a measure through the legislative assembly.
Vermont’s legislation will let anyone over the age of 18 with an “incurable and irreversible disease” and a maximum of six months to live to get a prescription for lethal drugs. The measure requires two doctors to make the medical determination whether or not a patient qualifies for assisted suicide. The patient must also be capable of self-administering drugs, which would be difficult in the rare instances in which someone is fully paralyzed.
In order to obtain the lethal drugs, a terminally ill patient must make written and oral requests to the prescribing physician and wait at least 48 hours before receiving the drugs. The requests would need to be witnessed by two “disinterested” individuals, which the bill defines as anyone that is not related to the patient, doctors or employees of the healthcare facility. Doctors will not be obliged to help the patient with his or her suicide.

Thursday, May 9, 2013

Israel approves new settlement as US pledges renewed peace talks

End Of Days News

This file picture taken on April 22, 2102 shows a general view of the illegal Ulpana outpost, adjacent to the Beit El Jewish settlement near the Palestinian West Bank city of Ramallah. (AFP Photo / Gali Tibbon)

Israel has given the green light to build almost 300 homes in the West Bank amid US pledges to restart peace talks with Palestine. The move comes two days after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pledged to halt the settlement program.
The new homes will be constructed at the settlement of Beit El near Ramallah in the West Bank.
"The Civil Administration has given the green light for 296 housing units at Beit El, but this is only the first stage of a process before actual construction can begin," a spokesperson for the Israeli government told reporters.
Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat slammed the settlement plans as an attempt to “sabotage” fresh efforts to encourage peace talks.
The announcement comes just two days after Prime Minister Netanyahu vowed to halt the settlement program and give the Obama Administration a chance to kick-start peace talks.
“This initiative proves Netanyahu is deceiving the world,” Hagit Ofran of Israeli watchdog Peace Now told AFP. “On the one hand, he lets us believe that he is putting the brakes on settlement and on the other, he gives the go-ahead for an enormous building project.”
Negotiations hit a brick wall in 2010 when the Palestinians refused to pursue talks if Israel carried on with its settlement program, which is widely perceived to be in breach of international law.

Read more: http://rt.com/news/pledging-talks-peace-renew-048/

Tuesday, March 12, 2013

California seizes guns from owners - and it might become a national model

End Of Days News

Steel workers look over a pile confiscated illegal weapons in  Rancho Cucamonga, California (AFP Photo / David McNew)

In California, the government is already coming for the guns.
Notwithstanding the Second Amendment, rules and regulations across the United States outline certain restrictions for who can legally possess a firearm. In the state of California, factors such as a felony conviction or a history of mental health issues mean roughly 20,000 gun owners are holding onto their firearms illegally. Slowly but surely, though, Golden State police officers are prying them away. 
There’s more, though: backers of the program suggest this becomes a nation-wide practice, and are asking the White House to help make it happen.
“Very, very few states have an archive of firearm owners like we have,” Garen Wintemute of the Violence Prevention Research Program tells Bloomberg News. Wintemute helped set up a program on the West Coast that monitors not just licensed gun owners but also watches for any red flags that could be raised after admittance to a mental health institute or a quick stint in the slammer.
Wintemute says that as many as 200,000 people across the United States may no longer be qualified to own firearms, and in California they are making sure that number drops day by day. In one example cited in this week’s Bloomberg report, journalists recall a recent scene where nine California Justice Department agents equipped with 40-caliber Glock pistols and outfitted in bulletproof vests knocked on a suburban residence, requested to speak to a certain gun owner and then walked away with whatever arsenal they could apprehend.

Friday, March 8, 2013

White House admits it can't kill Americans with drones in US

End Of Days News

Rand Paul (Brendan Hoffman / Getty Images / AFP)
 
Two leading figures within the Obama administration now insist that the president of the United States does not have the authority to launch drone strikes on US soil.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) received a response from the Obama administration on Thursday afternoon after spending 13 hours demanding answers about the possible use of drones inside of the United States.

During a briefing Thursday afternoon, White House press secretary Jay Carney said, "The president has not and would not use drone strikes against American citizens on American soil.”

Mr. Carney also elected to read a statement penned by Attorney General Eric Holder earlier that day that had been sent to Sen. Paul. Mr. Holder’s entire statement, only 43 words, confirmed Mr. Carney’s remark.

“It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: ‘Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?’ The answer to that question is no,” wrote the attorney general.

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

EU report slams Israeli settlements, calls for economic sanctions

End Of Days News

An Israeli army bulldozer destroys Palestinian houses in the east Jerusalem Arab neighbourhood of Silwan in JerusalemТs old city on January 28, 2013. (AFP Photo / Ahmad Gharabli)
 
An internal report by the European Union has come down hard on Israel’s decision to continue settlement construction in occupied East Jerusalem, threatening to end economic projects that involve the Jewish settlements.

The harshly worded 15-page report provides recommendations to the 27 member-states for responding to Israel’s activities in the occupied territories – which the document described as “systematic, deliberate and provocative” – and endorses a strategy that aims at “making it impossible for Jerusalem to become the capital of two states.”

Seven of the report’s 10 recommendations propose slapping tough economic sanctions on organizations directly involved in construction projects in the Jewish settlements, Israeli daily Haaretz reported. The report also called on the EU’s 27 member-states to “prevent, discourage and raise awareness” about doing business with companies that work in the disputed settlement zones.

It advised EU states to work to ensure that products exported from the settlements not receive an unfair advantage through “preferential tariffs,” and to give consumers an opportunity to make an “informed choice” through clear labeling of products’ origins.

The report advocated “closer supervision” of technological research and development programs between the EU and Israel. The measures would work to ensure that “no research grants, scholarships or other technological investments assist settlements, either directly or indirectly,” or be provided to agencies working in the settlements.

Tuesday, February 5, 2013

US senators have requested the legal justification for the killings of US citizens suspected of terrorism by the Obama administration. Meanwhile a ‘chilling’ leaked memo showed that the government sees little need for constraint on the issue

End Of Days News

MQ-1 Predator (AFP Photo / US Airforce / Julianne Showalter)
 
US senators have requested the legal justification for the killings of US citizens suspected of terrorism by the Obama administration. Meanwhile a ‘chilling’ leaked memo showed that the government sees little need for constraint on the issue.
A group of 11 senators on Monday wrote a letter to President Barack Obama, asking him to release all Justice Department memos on the practice of targeting US citizens suspected of being terrorist leaders with lethal force, particularly drone airstrikes. The request comes as the administration seeks Senate approval for John Brennan, Obama's nomination for CIA chief.
"As the Senate considers a number of nominees for senior national security positions, we ask that you ensure that Congress is provided with the secret legal opinions outlining your authority to authorize the killing of Americans in the course of counterterrorism operations," the letter's opening paragraph reads.
Brennan, who is deputy national security advisor to the president, is to face questioning from the Senate Intelligence Committee on February 7. As the Obama administration carries on many of the Bush-era policies that exist in something of a legal gray area, lawmakers want to be sure they have all the information possible in order to "avoid an unnecessary confrontation that could affect the Senate's consideration of nominees for national security positions."
And in case the White House attempts to block the release of the documents by appealing to some legal "privilege," the legislators continue, "We would encourage you to simply waive whatever privilege might apply, if you would like to make it clear that you are not setting a precedent that applies to other categories of documents."
The legislators are not alone in their desire to see the secret justification for targeted killing of Americans by the US administration. The New York Times and the ACLU have filed a lawsuit seeking access to the Justice Department memos on the issue under the Freedom of Information Act.
Previously a number of US officials, including Brannon, Attorney General Eric Holder and others, have argued in public speeches in favor of drone killings of Americans who pose an imminent threat to the country. But apparently in practice the administration has a broader view on what constitutes the imminence of a threat.
NBC News published on Tuesday a copy of a 16-page memo detailing legal reasoning of the killings, which was provided to members of the Senate Intelligence and Judiciary committees in June on condition that it would not be discussed publicly.
The white paper argues that the US is operating lawfully in kill “senior operational leaders of Al-Qaeda or an associated force” even if a person happens to be a US citizen and is not known to be planning an attack on America.
“The condition that an operational leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on US persons and interests will take place in the immediate future,” the memo states.
It is sufficient that an “informed, high-level” official of the US government determines that the target of the killing has been “recently” involved in “activities” posing a threat of a violent attack and “there is no evidence suggesting that he has renounced or abandoned such activities” the document says. It gives no definitions of “recently” or “activities”.
Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the ACLU, called the white paper “a chilling document” that “redefines the word imminence in a way that deprives the word of its ordinary meaning.”
“Basically, it argues that the government has the right to carry out the extrajudicial killing of an American citizen. It recognizes some limits on the authority it sets out, but the limits are elastic and vaguely defined, and it’s easy to see how they could be manipulated,” he told NBC News.
Obama had attempted to nominate Brennan for the post in 2009, at the start of his first term, but Brennan withdrew his name from consideration after facing claims that he supported former President George W. Bush’s torture program. Brennan was described as a “supporter of the ‘dark side’ policies,” with critics claiming his appointment “would dishearten and alienate those who opposed torture under the Bush administration,” read a letter sent to Obama in 2008.