Sentence examples for detention authorization from inspiring English sources

Furthermore, the language used to describe this detention authorization is so broad that many argue that even American citizens are now susceptible to indefinite imprisonment.

The detention authority stems from the 2001 authorization to use military force passed by Congress after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

It also claimed that the statute created no new detention authority that did not already exist in the original authorization to use military force.

Judge Forrest raised the question of how to interpret the original Authorization for Use of Military Force, or AUMF, passed by Congress in 2001 because the government argued that the National Defense Authorization Act did not expand the scope of its detention authority.

The second argument is that the justification for never-ending detention under the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) was that it was needed to prevent committed enemies of the US returning to the battlefield.

We also conclude that Padilla's detention was not authorized by Congress, and absent such authorization, the President does not have the power under Article II of the Constitution to detain as an enemy combatant an American citizen seized on American soil outside a zone of combat.

Before voting to leave current law unchanged, the Senate rejected, 55 to 45, a proposal by Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, to instead say that Americans are exempt from detention under the 2001 authorization to use military force.

As Professors Lederman and Vladeck note, "The new Feinstein amendment... does protect the vast majority of persons in the United States from noncriminal detention without express statutory authorization......

Hussein will be paroled from detention and get work authorization, yet he will have hanging over his head an outstanding order of deportation that the INS can execute whenever it believes it is safe for Hussein to go home.

Civil liberties groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, still oppose the law, in part because of its authorization of military detention camps overseas.

The appeals court held that, assuming that express congressional authorization of the detention was required by 18 U.S.C. § 4001(a)–which provides that “[n]o citizen shall be imprisoned or otherwise detained by the United States except pursuant to an Act of Congress”– the AUMF’s “necessary and appropriate force” language provided the authorization for Hamdi’s detention.