[bhunter]

Finding a common cause between two usually opposing groups is always interesting IMHO. Here both the left and right seek to limit government power.

Last week saw another setback for the Obama Administration. Led by Pulitzer Prize-winner journalist, Christopher Hedges, a group of plaintiffs that includes, among others: Pentagon Papers whistle-blower, Daniel Ellsberg; M.I.T. professor and American dissident, Noam Chomsky; several Occupy groups, and U.S. Day of Rage, won a temporary injunction against part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) signed by Mr. Obama back on December 31, 2011. Ironically, this set of plaintiffs would generally be regarded as part of Mr. Obama’s left-wing political base.

A further irony is that several conservative groups filed amicus (friend) briefs in support of the liberal plaintiffs. They are: the Gun Owners Foundation, Gun Owners of America, Inc., Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund, Restoring Liberty Action Committee, the Tenth Amendment Center, and the Center for Media and Democracy.

On May 16, 2012, U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest suspended the enforcement of Section 1021 of the NDAA.
...
...
The plaintiffs argued that Section 1021 was vague to the point that the President could have virtually anyone picked up off of American streets by the U.S. military and taken to Club Gitmo for an indefinite, “throw-away-the-key” stay in the tropics. In agreeing with the plaintiffs, Judge Forrest found that terms such as: “substantially supported,” “directly supported,” or “associated forces” were not clearly defined.

From “Central View,” by William Hamilton, J.D., Ph.D.

Even if one trusts this particular President, the potential for abuse far outweighs any potential law enforcement advantage.