California Governor Signs Ban on NDAA Detentions

jerry brown 350x250By Jason Ditz

State Will Not Cooperate With Any Federal Attempts to Detain Californians

After an overwhelmingly successful run through the California legislature last months, Governor Jerry Brown has signed AB351, a law banning all cooperation with the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) or any other federal attempts to indefinitely detain people.

The NDAA allows the president to place people into indefinite detention by the US military without charges or a trial on “national security” grounds and has sparked a series of lawsuits from Americans who fear detention as political dissidents.

The NDAA has been hugely controversial and several states are considering limited legislation to that end, but California took the matter a step farther and not only forbade cooperation state officials with the NDAA, but also every other federal law present or future that might be used for open-ended detentions.

California Governor Signs Ban on NDAA Detentions [continued]


A free, once–weekly e-mail round-up of liberty news, articles and activism.

  • Daredstone

    Wow, out of CA no less… I’ll give credit where it’s due. Well done, Gov. Brown!


      Indeed. :)

  • Silverado

    And I’ll second that. Who would have thought this….OUT OF CALIFORNIA??? Wow is right!!

  • Morgan Sokol

    He made it legal for hemp to be grown in our state yesterday too. Funny thing is when you go far enough left or right you meet, kinda like Kucinich and Ron Paul

    • marmaru

      Both Kucinich and Paul live by and honor their Oath of Office. Unlike almost ALL the others. This is not about left or right. It is about Authoritarian Rule vs Individual Liberty/Responsibility.
      Politics is about who or whom get to feed from the public trough first. “Government is Force”
      Kinda like being a responsible adult or a ward of the state.

  • disqus_QL1YH2nQC1

    Thank God, many of us are fighting for our rights! The section of the NDAA sections 1032, 1033….

    has been added to the military bill. Some do not believe that those sections in the NDAA doesn’t cover U.S.CITIZENS…

    Read here:

  • ted thomas

    Exactly how is Governor Brown going to prevent goon squads from jumping out of an unmarked van and abducting someone?

  • ted thomas

    Feinstein must be pissed.

  • sharkcity

    I love Kucinich and Paul -they could have won the election -they agree on the big issues and as the good Doctor always says Freedom bring peeps together..
    I love Cali too -the creative types in San Fran lead the world in tech and the same can be said for LA which leads the entertainment industry. Nothing personal but we could do without Sacramento..

  • marmaru

    How can the NDAA of 2011, an appropriations bill with a huge amount of pork attached, legislate away the 4th, 5th, 9th, &10th Amendments??? When did We The People surrender the Amendment Process? I missed the memo!
    How is authoring, co-sponsoring, or signing legislation, that violates the Oath of Office to “preserve, defend, and protect, the Constitution of The United States of America…” not TREASON!
    The Oath of Office is a legal and binding contract with the electorate.
    The Bill of Rights were never intended to be a code of law for the Electorate. This was added on because Madison and Henry realized that LAW was not defined and the Federal Government, their employees and contractors needed further limits (spelled out literally) on their activities and responsibilities. This is the reason that the “law” seems so interpretable. These original 10 Amendments were for the bleeping Federal Government, not US! We had Common Law (at least that was the plan).
    This is where the Founders left us wanting. They did not codify LAW or a base code of LAW. There are many reasons both political and geo-political, but the main reason was that society was not able or willing to honor the promise of the Declaration of Independence. “ALL men are created equal”!
    Society of the times had women with the legal status of chattel. Institutionalized slavery for an entire race of Mankind. The “indian problem” which was later “handled” with the genocidal concept to be known as Manifest Destiny.
    Are we still so stuck in these primitive ways as to not be able to better define what a “Person” is?
    “Do all you have agreed to do and do not encroach on other PERSONS or their property” Richard J Maybury in a wonderful little book called “Whatever Happened to Justice”.
    Codify this as the base code of Law, or something akin to it. Hold our “elected” officials to their Oath of Office on penalty of being held accountable for the harm they do. Stop the Statist jury tampering. Legislation is not Law, it is rules. The “jury of your peers” concept is to be able to limit this fallacy of Statism at the court level. Law is discovered, rules are made!
    More politics and rules are not the answer. Even though this one is on track, it should be unnecessary. The more rules a society has, the less civilized that society is. When we look outside ourselves for authority, we will find tyranny.
    “America is advanced Citizenship”. This principle is based on Self Government. Not hiring some more “gameshow hosts” to make more rules and “laws”, but to govern one’s self.
    How bad do you want it?