Is it not true historically that when we are in the midst of a national security challenge or crisis, and questions of civil liberties arise, that many times we do not want to face them head on; that it is not until later in history that we look back and say we should have asked harder questions, questions about the suspension of civil liberties in wartime, questions about internment camps, questions about policies that we followed? If I understand what the Senator is seeking in this amendment, it is to say at this point in time what we are asking for is a disclosure of those people who have been detained and arrested and are in special status, whose rights at least may be compromised because of our concern about national security; and that disclosure is all that this amendment is about, giving the administration the last word and determination as to which names might be held back and not disclosed because of security concerns.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing civil liberties and national security during a Senate debate.
Share
More from Dick Durbin
I want to recognize the incredible partnership that made this possible: Stone Community Development Corporation, Lurie Children’s, Thresholds, and Chicago Neighborhood Initiatives.
The American Red Cross declared a national blood supply crisis in the U.S. last month for just the second time ever, which has impacted patients’ ability to be treated for illnesses or undergo surgery.
Simply put, no president has the authority to unilaterally demolish and remodel the country’s White House in such a significant manner without congressional approval.
The lawmakers also emphasized that the Trump Administration’s definition of medical frailty far exceeds what is outlined in the law itself and creates additional onerous barriers for both patients and states.





