You're not alone, not "getting it".
Answer: U.S. Citizens
CAN BE detained.
You have to read this like a lawyer would,looking for ANY MEANS NECESSARY to evade, twist, or misread ANY word,so as to construe the "intent" of the law into your favor.
Like stated earlier:
"The Administration and Democratic members are in full spin — using language designed to obscure the authority given to the military.
The exemption for American citizens from the mandatory detention requirement (section 1032) is the screening language for the next section, 1031,
which offers no exemption for American citizens from the authorization to use the military to indefinitely detain people without charge or trial."
Under
SECTION 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY., sub-paragraph:
(b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.— sub-paragraph:
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.— says:The requirement to detain a person in military custody under
this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.
Notice the word
"requirement".
It doesn't
prohibit military custody
OF citizens of the United States.
It just says "it's not
required".
It can still be done, but it's not "
required" to be done.
So, do you think a military person is going to
refuse an Executive Order to "detain" a citizen of the United States?
I’ve read other excerpts that were worded differently. I guess the Senate and House have different versions. This thing is so horrible.
I supposed great legal minds will be going over this with a fine tooth comb.
Why did any Rs vote for this thing?