American Civil Liberties Union

We are heartened that Montana Sen. Max Baucus is opposing two provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which strike at the heart of our constitutional protections for a fair justice system.

Those two provisions would authorize indefinite detention of American citizens without any charges and without a trial (Section 1031) and require that all terrorism suspects be held in military custody (Section 1032).

The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times have both joined our fight for civilian trials for terrorism suspects and against a troubling detention provision in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The NDAA provision would allow for the indefinite military custody of those accused of terrorism and could even allow for the indefinite detention without charge or trial of American citizens. Quoting from the New York Times, here are a few of the problems with the provision:

Buried in a New York Times story on the Obama administration’s failure to close Guantanamo Bay a few weeks ago was a link to Sen. Lindsey Graham’s (R-S.C.) much-discussed and much-anticipated draft legislation. For months and months, we’ve read story after story about Sen. Graham’s negotiations on habeas corpus and detention policy for “enemy combatants” with the White House, but this was the first time the draft policy was made public.

Since last Thursday's ProPublica and Washington Post article about the unlikelihood of the Obama administration meeting its own goal (PDF) of shuttering Guantánamo by January 22, 2010, Gitmo has constantly been in the news.

With all the discussion, it's important to reiterate that how Guantánamo will be closed is just as important as when.