WASHINGTON -- The top Democrat responsible for America's indefinite detention law sees no reason to change the measure after it was ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge last week.
Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) shepherded the law through the Senate last year, codifying for the first time policies asserted by the White House since after 9/11 when Congress passed an authorization to use military force against al Qaeda and anyone who supported it.
Federal judge Katherine Forrest, of New York's Southern District Court, found the law violates the due process and free speech protections of the Constitution after government lawyers could not say in court that reporters couldn't be held under the law if they covered someone deemed to be a supporter of al Qaeda.
But Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, dismissed Forrest's ruling, and said he doesn't intend to make any changes to the law when his committee takes up this year's National Defense Authorization Act starting Wednesday.
"I don't think we need any [changes]," Levin said, insisting, as administration lawyers did in court, that the measure did nothing new and was merely an affirmation of existing law. "I don't know of any clarifying language. How much clearer can you be than the law, which says we're not changing the law?"
Levin was referring to a part of the provision -- in Section 1021 of the law -- that says it shall not be construed to affect existing law.
But Forrest disagreed, writing that 1021 "is not merely an 'affirmation' of the [Authorization to Use Military Force]. To so hold would be contrary to basic principles of legislative interpretation that require Congressional enactments to be given independent meaning."
The law expressly requires that terrorism suspects be detained by the military, and allows U.S. citizens to be held as well, although they are exempted from mandatory military detention. President Barack Obama further issued rules barring military jails for citizens, however those rules are not binding on the next president.
"I read the administration's briefs, and I think the administration was right and she was wrong," said Levin.
Instead of making changes, he favors battling it out in the courts.
"I would hope the administration would appeal that, and expect they would, given their position, that we did not change the law in last year's bill on this subject at all," Levin said.
Levin admitted that "there's always a chance" other senators could try to change the measure. ""They're free to do that if they want," Levin said.
Indeed, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has proposed a bill that would fully exempt citizens and legal residents from military lockups. Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) has a bill that would exempt all people in the United States, because the Constitution applies rights to persons, not just citizens.
"I think we have to clearly define it, and that's what we're trying to do," Feinstein said. She has 29 cosponsors, including five Republicans.
Many observers regard Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) as the real movers behind the provision.
McCain hammered the judge's decision Tuesday, calling it "ludicrous." But he also sounded more willing than Levin to consider changes.
"We'd like to try to take some steps to ensure that the American citizens have rights of appeals -- that's something we are looking at," McCain said.
"But we are steadfast that an enemy combatant is an enemy wherever they are in the world," he added, noting that the Obama administration carries out a far harsher policy regarding suspected terrorists in Pakistan and the Arabian peninsula who are targeted in drone strikes.
"It's OK to kill American citizens who are enemy combatants overseas, but if they're caught over here in the United States, we're reading them their Miranda rights," McCain said. "That's outrageous."
The House voted last week to maintain indefinite detention.
Michael McAuliff covers politics and Congress for The Huffington Post. Talk to him on Facebook.
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
It's Another Trump-Biden Showdown — And We Need Your Help
The Future Of Democracy Is At Stake
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
Your Loyalty Means The World To Us
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
The 2024 election is heating up, and women's rights, health care, voting rights, and the very future of democracy are all at stake. Donald Trump will face Joe Biden in the most consequential vote of our time. And HuffPost will be there, covering every twist and turn. America's future hangs in the balance. Would you consider contributing to support our journalism and keep it free for all during this critical season?
HuffPost believes news should be accessible to everyone, regardless of their ability to pay for it. We rely on readers like you to help fund our work. Any contribution you can make — even as little as $2 — goes directly toward supporting the impactful journalism that we will continue to produce this year. Thank you for being part of our story.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
It's official: Donald Trump will face Joe Biden this fall in the presidential election. As we face the most consequential presidential election of our time, HuffPost is committed to bringing you up-to-date, accurate news about the 2024 race. While other outlets have retreated behind paywalls, you can trust our news will stay free.
But we can't do it without your help. Reader funding is one of the key ways we support our newsroom. Would you consider making a donation to help fund our news during this critical time? Your contributions are vital to supporting a free press.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our journalism free and accessible to all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. Would you consider becoming a regular HuffPost contributor?
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. If circumstances have changed since you last contributed, we hope you'll consider contributing to HuffPost once more.
Support HuffPostAlready contributed? Log in to hide these messages.