Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

truedelphi

(32,324 posts)
Wed Oct 2, 2013, 05:43 PM Oct 2013

Wow! Gov Brown (Calif.) Signs the Nullification of NDAA into law.

By Nick Hankoff on October 2, 2013 in Uncategorized 7

Assembly Bill 351, commonly called the California Liberty Preservation Act, has been signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown making it statewide policy to refuse compliance with federal attempts to enforce “indefinite detention” made famous by the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA). What began as a marginal issue with little legislative support has unified Californians of all persuasions and brought attention to the proper role the people and their states play in a constitutional republic.

A selection of AB 351 reads:

The United States Constitution and the California Constitution provide for various civil liberties and other individual rights for a citizen of the United States and the State of California, including the right of habeas corpus, the right to due process, the right to a speedy and public trial, and the right to be informed of criminal charges brought against him or her.
Certain provisions of federal law affirm the authority of the President of the United States to use all necessary and appropriate force to detain specified persons who engaged in terrorist activities.
This bill would prohibit an agency in the State of California, a political subdivision of this state, an employee of an agency or a political subdivision of this state, as specified, or a member of the California National Guard, on official state duty, from knowingly aiding an agency of the Armed Forces of the United States in any investigation, prosecution, or detention of a person within California pursuant to (1) Sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (NDAA), (2) the federal law known as the Authorization for Use of Military Force, enacted in 2001, or (3) any other federal law, except as specified, if the state agency, political subdivision, employee, or member of the California National Guard would violate the United States Constitution, the California Constitution, or any law of this state by providing that aid. The bill would also prohibit local entities from knowingly using state funds and funds allocated by the state to those local entities on and after January 1, 2013, to engage in any activity that aids an agency of the Armed Forces of the United States in the detention of any person within California for purposes of implementing Sections 1021 and 1022 of the NDAA or the federal law known as the Authorization for Use of Military Force , if that activity would violate the United States Constitution, the California Constitution, or any law of this state, as specified.

The bill’s common name is “The California Liberty Preservation Act.” California’s legislation takes things a step further than other states, which have implemented nullification legislation with regard to the NDAA.

The bill specifically states:
It is the policy of this state to refuse to provide material support for or to participate in any way with the implementation within this state of any federal law that purports to authorize indefinite detention of a person within California. (emphasis added)

This meaning of the legislation takes aim at not only the NDAA provision, but any federal law, which seeks to disregard one’s constitutional rights.

25 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Wow! Gov Brown (Calif.) Signs the Nullification of NDAA into law. (Original Post) truedelphi Oct 2013 OP
GREAT TO HEAR! Dawson Leery Oct 2013 #1
Isn't it good news? truedelphi Oct 2013 #2
So many great stories out of California! BrotherIvan Oct 2013 #3
Man, do I love my governor Downtown Hound Oct 2013 #4
Man, do I love your governor! nt livingwagenow Oct 2013 #5
I'd like to share a story... KansDem Oct 2013 #9
Is there a way to clone him??? movonne Oct 2013 #14
Awesome news. knr nt. livingwagenow Oct 2013 #6
WOW! is right! K&R nt snappyturtle Oct 2013 #7
God bless you, Jerry Brown Jack Rabbit Oct 2013 #8
Good thought, but since the NDAA has been ruled by federal courts to not authorize geek tragedy Oct 2013 #10
Given that it was the core of the Obama Administration itself that wanted this truedelphi Oct 2013 #15
Gov. Jerry Brown Hutzpa Oct 2013 #11
Awesome Gov. Brown. so awesome. I love calif..nt xiamiam Oct 2013 #12
Are there any Federal indefinite detention prisoners in California? Or is this just a declaration... marble falls Oct 2013 #13
I think this it much more about truedelphi Oct 2013 #16
How does a state law trump federal law? marble falls Oct 2013 #18
Well, I agree, the law sure does not trump Fed Law. truedelphi Oct 2013 #21
Hopfully more "the people do not want this" than "and blah, blah, blah". I wish there ways... marble falls Oct 2013 #22
Hopefully all the states will do this. It was an outrageous violation of sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #24
Hey Californians. Do you think the old man might be up for another run for President? bklyncowgirl Oct 2013 #17
I don't think he'll run for President.. Tikki Oct 2013 #23
Lots of hypocrites in this thread Renew Deal Oct 2013 #19
Wow! K&R! Enthusiast Oct 2013 #20
hes the greatest reddread Oct 2013 #25

truedelphi

(32,324 posts)
2. Isn't it good news?
Wed Oct 2, 2013, 05:46 PM
Oct 2013

I mean, in the words of Tenth Amendment Center’s national communications director Mike Mike Maharrey, who tells us-
“Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle came together and passed legislation to protect against federal kidnapping,” adding that, “by saying, ‘No!’ to indefinite detention and refusing any state cooperation, the California legislature and Gov. Brown just ensured it will be very hard to whisk somebody away in the dead of night and hold them without due process.”

Downtown Hound

(12,618 posts)
4. Man, do I love my governor
Wed Oct 2, 2013, 06:37 PM
Oct 2013

I've lived in this state since 1986, and that's the first time I've ever said that and meant it. I would vote for this man from now until doomsday if I was allowed.

KansDem

(28,498 posts)
9. I'd like to share a story...
Wed Oct 2, 2013, 08:01 PM
Oct 2013

I'm a native Californian and grew up in the Long Beach area. I graduated high school and attended LBCC for three semesters. I then transferred to SDSU in 1972. Well, during the election of 1974 a couple of students told me they were delaying their graduation a semester because Jerry Brown had just been elected and they wanted to wait until he was sworn in.

Why? They wanted Brown's name on their diplomas instead of "you know who!"

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
10. Good thought, but since the NDAA has been ruled by federal courts to not authorize
Wed Oct 2, 2013, 08:02 PM
Oct 2013

such detentions, more posturing than anything of actual substance.

truedelphi

(32,324 posts)
15. Given that it was the core of the Obama Administration itself that wanted this
Wed Oct 2, 2013, 09:12 PM
Oct 2013

Indefinite detention clause to be upheld (Which this past spring, Judge Forrest refused to allow) any additional ammunition we citizens in California can use to prevent this type of abrogation of our rights sounds pretty good to me.

marble falls

(57,073 posts)
13. Are there any Federal indefinite detention prisoners in California? Or is this just a declaration...
Wed Oct 2, 2013, 08:16 PM
Oct 2013

to not accept any indefinite detained prisoner from any source, including the Federal Government.

truedelphi

(32,324 posts)
16. I think this it much more about
Wed Oct 2, 2013, 09:22 PM
Oct 2013

the prevention of any citizen here in California being kidnapped and held by the Federal Government, than about California accepting prisoners.

More than a few people in California were rounded up secretly by the Federal Government right after Nine Eleven.

They were held simply on account of being of Middle Eastern Decent, and actively participating in their Muslim religion.

In some cases, even close relatives did not know where the apprehended people were for several weeks. (Can you imagine being a parent of a college age son, and suddenly they are no longer in touch, and no one tells you where they are for several weeks?)

I remember the San Jose Mercury running an article explaining what happened to one such young man. He first lost his car, which had been almost totally paid off, but in the first weeks of his incarceration, he certainly could not make car payments. He also lost his job, and his fiancee eventually broke their engagement. Upon his release, he had to argue with his college to not give him incompletes and "F"'s on various school subjects, since he had not decided not to go to his classes, but had been stopped from doing that.

I have no idea if he was able to sue for damages, upon his release. but there never seemed to be any real reason for holding him, other than his skin was brown, and his last name and ethnicity identified him as Middle Eastern descent!

And he was just one example.

truedelphi

(32,324 posts)
21. Well, I agree, the law sure does not trump Fed Law.
Sun Oct 6, 2013, 03:18 PM
Oct 2013

But it does make it harder for any Presidential Administration to say, "The people of the state of Calif. are 100% behind me in my need to have the NDAA to help us fully secure the democracy that this nation stands for. (And Blah blah blah.&quot

marble falls

(57,073 posts)
22. Hopfully more "the people do not want this" than "and blah, blah, blah". I wish there ways...
Mon Oct 7, 2013, 10:22 AM
Oct 2013

to make California law on this more of an road map and a lot less of an exception.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
24. Hopefully all the states will do this. It was an outrageous violation of
Mon Oct 7, 2013, 11:02 AM
Oct 2013

the Constitution when Bush implemented these medieval laws and it still is astounding that any nation claiming to be a democracy would support this in any way.

If all the states oppose it, maybe finally, we can turn back the clock on these egregious Bush policies.

bklyncowgirl

(7,960 posts)
17. Hey Californians. Do you think the old man might be up for another run for President?
Wed Oct 2, 2013, 09:52 PM
Oct 2013

I know he's up there in years but he still seems to get things done and frankly, getting California's fiscal house in order was nothing short of a miracle. I also think that governors with a long list of accomplishments seem to make the most effective presidents.

I always liked the guy from a distance. I supported him when he ran against Clinton in the primaries. Is there any chance he might be interested in going for it one more time?

Tikki

(14,556 posts)
23. I don't think he'll run for President..
Mon Oct 7, 2013, 10:32 AM
Oct 2013

Some health reasons and his age. But we love him here and
I can proudly say I voted for him many times.


Tikki

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Wow! Gov Brown (Calif.) S...