OK, today the Obama administration published, as an executive order, the new set of procedures for handling prisoners at Guantánamo.
http://www.scribd.com/...
Part of the context of this is HR2346 of 2009, which supposedly prevents any transfer of prisoners from Guantánamo to the US mainland for trial.
http://www.opencongress.org/...
The question is, in what way does HR2346 prevent prisoners being transferred to the US mainland?
Here is the relevant section of the Supplemental Appropriations law:
Sec. 14103. (a) None of the funds made available in this or any prior Act may be used to release an individual who is detained as of the date of enactment of this Act, at Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, into the continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, or the District of Columbia.
(b) None of the funds made available in this or any prior Act may be used to transfer an individual who is detained as of the date of enactment of this Act, at Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for the purpose of detention in the continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, or the District of Columbia, except as provided in subsection (c).
(c) None of the funds made available in this or any prior Act may be used to transfer an individual who is detained, as of the date of enactment of this Act, at Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, into the continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, or the District of Columbia, for the purposes of prosecuting such individual, or detaining such individual during legal proceedings, until 45 days after the plan detailed in subsection (d) is received.
(d) The President shall submit to the Congress, in classified form, a plan regarding the proposed disposition of any individual covered by subsection (c) who is detained as of the date of enactment of this Act. Such plan shall include, at a minimum, each of the following for each such individual:
(1) The findings of an analysis regarding any risk to the national security of the United States that is posed by the transfer of the individual.
(2) The costs associated with transferring the individual in question.
(3) The legal rationale and associated court demands for transfer.
(4) A plan for mitigation of any risk described in paragraph (1).
(5) A copy of a notification to the Governor of the State to which the individual will be transferred or to the Mayor of the District of Columbia if the individual will be transferred to the District of Columbia with a certification by the Attorney General of the United States in classified form at least 14 days prior to such transfer (together with supporting documentation and justification) that the individual poses little or no security risk to the United States.
(e) None of the funds made available in this or any prior Act may be used to transfer or release an individual detained at Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as of the date of enactment of this Act, to the country of such individual’s nationality or last habitual residence or to any other country other than the United States, unless the President submits to the Congress, in classified form 15 days prior to such transfer, the following information:
(1) The name of any individual to be transferred or released and the country to which such individual is to be transferred or released.
(2) An assessment of any risk to the national security of the United States or its citizens, including members of the Armed Services of the United States, that is posed by such transfer or release and the actions taken to mitigate such risk.
(3) The terms of any agreement with another country for acceptance of such individual, including the amount of any financial assistance related to such agreement.
As I read this bill, all it does is to require the President to submit a form to Congress 45 days before a transfer. It doesn't say that Congress has to approve anything; it doesn't say that anyone does. Now, that's for transfer to trial or to another prison. It does prevent the release of a detainee into the US.
Also, since it is an appropriations law, all it actually does is to prevent the use of funds appropriated in the law. If a prisoner needed to be released into the US and a non-governmental organization such as Amnesty International covered the expenses, this would not come under this law as I see it.
So, what's going on here? How does this law have the effect that everyone is saying that it does?
Thanks to anyone who can shed some light on this for me.