On the recordJune 13, 2013
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to speak. I think it is very straightforward. Certainly we should acknowledge and have this bit of information made available to us, and I don't oppose that. I just want to take the time to raise the issue of the next amendment--the Smith-Gibson amendment--that's coming up on this whole broader issue. This is a very simple, straightforward debate, that is, the militarization of U.S. law enforcement. That's really what we're concerned about with indefinite detention. There are some who believe that any terrorist act committed within the U.S., that the U.S. military should basically take over. You should have indefinite detention; you should basically get rid of the normal due process contained in the Constitution. I think that is dangerous, wrong, and wholly unnecessary. I think the U.S. Constitution and the Department of Justice have proven themselves more than capable of investigating, capturing, prosecuting, trying, convicting, and incarcerating all the terrorists in the U.S.; and I think it is a dangerous step towards executive and military power to allow things like indefinite detention under military control within the U.S. That's the heart and the essence of this issue. We are dancing around the U.S. citizen question. I take Mr. Goodlatte at his word. I believe that the Constitution doesn't apply to everybody, but it doesn't just apply to U.S. citizens either, as he acknowledged. It applies to U.S.…





