On the recordMay 17, 2012
Mr. Chair, I yield myself 1 minute. First of all, the previous amendment doesn't say anything about pre- 2001. As the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Amash) correctly stated, it says, If you have constitutional rights, you have them. It doesn't say anything about restoring them prior to 2001. It doesn't address the issue, and I apologize. I do not question Mr. Gohmert's motives. I suspect that's what he wanted to do. That's not what his amendment does. If you want to protect the rights of people in this country, then you need to support this amendment, the Smith amendment. And this is a very important debate. Back in 2001, we passed the authorization for the use of military force. Post-9/11, it made sense, I think, to be careful, to give the President the power he needed to protect us. But what we've learned in the last 10 years is one power that he does not need is the power to indefinitely detain or place in military custody people here in the United States. Our justice system works. The Department of Justice works. The FBI works. They have arrested, convicted, and locked up over 400 terrorists and have gotten all kinds of actionable intelligence out of them. The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
