“A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States...”
Too much latitude for interpretation here. What are associated forces? What kind of hostilities?
OWS is a loose association that was hostile at times. Will they still get due process if they reconvene and become violent?
Did you read the part that says it doesn’t apply to citizens of the United States, lawful resident aliens, or those captured within the borders of the United States?
Yes, since the govt would have to prove that this bill applies to them in a court of law first-esp since the bill was intended to apply only to someone who either was a member or provided support to Al Qaeda, Taliban or an affiliated Terror outfit or had a direct role in 9/11. Then they would have to come to a sort of consensus on whether or not existing law allows for their detainment-since again, this bill states that the laws regarding detaining US citizens and legal aliens are the same as they were before. And whether or not existing law and our current state of conflict allow for detention and suspension of Habeus Corpus is highly debated, thus clearly contestable in a court of law. So in a way, they would get due process-if the govt was still interested in playing by the rules and following the laws. If they werent, then NDAA 2012 would be wholly irrelevant anyway,