On the recordNovember 29, 2012
that was a good debate. Senator Feinstein is always gracious and alert and smart in her arguments. I want to say one thing that is not in doubt. Some of my colleagues-- I think Senator Paul and others--have suggested that somehow the law of the United States has been changed in recent years, and we need the Feinstein amendment to fix it and restore the constitutional rights we are all entitled to. What I want to say, without any doubt and I think any fear of real contradiction, is this amendment alters the history of the United States, alters the long-term understanding of the rules of war, and places American citizens in a position where they cannot be treated effectively as an enemy of the state and detained, and actually be in a position to be released to continue their war against the United States. I think that is a bad policy. I agree with Senators Levin, Ayotte, and others who share their view. I am not quite able to understand--and I am not sure Senator Feinstein does--that this therefore establishes through understandings of Hamdi and the Supreme Court decision that therefore we can vote for it. I don't think it is the right step. I don't think we should alter the historical position of the United States that those who are at war with the United States are not treated as criminals. Southerners who were captured by Lincoln weren't released. When Washington dealt with the Whiskey Rebellion, he sent out Alexander Hamilton.…
Source
govinfo.gov




