On the recordNovember 29, 2012
it would be my intent, if we need additional time, unless there is something else that is needed at about 9:30 or so when this time runs out, to seek additional time for both-- for anyone who needs it, frankly. I do not know about both sides, because this is a multifaceted debate that we are going to have here tonight on this issue. I would yield myself 10 minutes. I would ask to be notified when I get to 10 minutes. The Feinstein amendment provides that no authorization for the use of military force may be construed to authorize the detention of U.S. citizens or lawful resident aliens who are captured inside the United States, unless--and this is a big ``unless''--an act of Congress expressly authorizes such detention. As I read the amendment, it says the military detention of U.S. citizens may be authorized in accordance with the law of war as long as this action is expressly authorized by Congress. Further, the amendment's requirement for express authorization applies only to the detention of U.S. citizens who are captured inside the United States. So no such authorization would be required for the detention of a U.S. citizen in the course of military operations overseas. I believe it is appropriate that Congress focus on the issue of military detention at the time they authorize the use of military force, as would be required by the Feinstein amendment. As the Supreme Court has stated: Detention is a fundamental and accepted incident to armed conflict.…





