"Where in This Bill does it Grant Authority to Indefinitely Detain US Citizens?"

[cthulu2016]

3. It does, but it is fair to debate how meaningful that is

sec. 1031 says that anyone anywhere in the world who aids AQ can be detained indefinately. (Under the laws of war.)

There is no exemption for Americans in that section.

It then says that the section does not change any existing law or authority on the question of people captured in America.

So yes, it does lay out indefinite detention at the military or president's discretion, and no, it does not exempt Americans.

If someone want to say that Americans are already exempt under other existing laws or authorities then that's fine! They have an argument to make.

But a lot of widespread defenses of the bill are literally not correct. They may be substansially correct -- i am not weighing in on that.

It grants authority to detain anyone, anywhere who meets either of the two standards of aplicability laid out in that section, and neither standard has anything to do with one's location of citizenship..

I am not an NDAA fan or an NDAA hater, but I'm not going to pretend words have no meaning.

The overall argument that the bill does nothing that is both odious and new may be correct but the speciffic claim that the bill exempts Americans from indefinite military detention is literally incorrect.

It may be a valid argument to say that is not very meaningful in contxt, but not that it doesn't exist in the bill.

The bill does, litterally, authorize detention of anyone who aids AQ within existing law.