On the recordDecember 14, 2011
I rise with profound respect for our Constitution and for my colleagues and friends who care deeply about the impact of this bill on that Constitution. It is because I have considered those issues that I would respectfully disagree with some of my colleagues and argue for the propriety and constitutionality of this bill. I would deplore the idea that an American citizen or a permanent resident alien could be rounded up and put in a prison in the United States of America. This bill does not authorize that scenario. I would deplore a circumstance where any person--even a person who is not here under some permanent legal status--could be rounded up and put in a prison and only a military prison. That is not what this bill authorizes. It leaves open the option that such a person could be detained in a regular civilian prison or in a military prison. I would reject completely the proposition that any person could be held in any facility--military or civilian--anywhere in our country indefinitely without the right to have the charges that are levied against them heard by some neutral finder of fact. It is our interpretation that the habeas corpus provisions already extend to these individuals. That is to say that a nonresident or nonlegal person in the country who is held under such circumstances in fact has the right of habeas corpus. I think the law requires it. I think the Constitution demands it.…





