You may remember that back in the summer of 2010, an attractive and curvaceous woman named Debrahlee Lorenzan sued Citibank for wrongful termination. Apparently Lorenzana was “too hot” — so hot, in fact, that she allegedly distracted other bankers from doing their jobs, resulting in her firing.

Just two years later, another woman claims that she was fired for similar reasons — her employers at a lingerie business allegedly told her she was “too hot” and that her breasts were “too large.” Now, we know what you must be thinking: how can one be “too hot,” or have breasts “too large” to work for a lingerie company?

First, let’s dig into the facts of the case. The plaintiff, Lauren Elizabeth Odes, has filed a gender and religious discrimination suit against her former employer, Native Intimates, with the assistance of her high-profile attorney, Gloria Allred.

When your breasts are as large as Odes’s g, you can’t just tape them down without defying the laws of physics. Besides, according to Reuters, Odes said that the lingerie business sold “thongs with hearts placed in the female genital area and boy shorts for women that say ‘hot’ in the buttocks area,” which she thought granted her license to dress “provocatively.”

And when we say “provocatively,” we mean too hot for the Orthodox Jewish owners of the company. In fact, in the New York Post  write-up, Ms. Allred noted that Odes was told she was “drawing attention from others,” and that she should tone down her style of dress “for her own safety.” Can we get an “oy vey” up in here?

In the wake of her lawsuit, perhaps this is the attention that Odes was looking for all along. She’s listed as a “Fahion executive/bartender” on Reality Wanted , a web site that helps aspiring reality-show cast members find work. You’d think that with those two big brains of hers, she’d be able to spell “fashion” correctly, but alas, that doesn’t seem to be her strong suit.

A jury awarded $450,000 to three family members, one of whom was seriously burned near Yosemite National Park in 2008 while filling the propane tank of a motorhome leased in Carson City NV.

The Superior Court panel deliberated for a week before reaching its verdict in the case brought by Dennis Domaille, his wife and daughter. Although the family’s damages were found to be in the millions of dollars, they were reduced by the jury’s finding that the lessor, Cruise America Inc., was only 10 percent liable. Domaille, now 61, suffered second- and third-degree burns over 45 percent of his body when a fireball erupted while he was tending to a customer’s leased 2005 Four Winds 28A motorhome.

The accident occurred in 2008, outside the family’s Tioga Gas Mart business in Lee Vining.

The family’s lawyer, John Raders, said he was disappointed with the verdict, but that overall the lawsuit produced good results for his clients because it included a “substantial settlement” with a co-defendant, AmeriGas Inc., before trial.

Defense attorney R. Mac Prout said he was concerned with the length of the deliberations, but relieved with the outcome considering Raders had recommended a total award of $33 million to the three plaintiffs.

“I can breathe,” Prout said.

The jury was asked to determine if the motorhome had a design defect by having a refrigerator burner and ignition directly above the tank filler valve. Prout told jurors the recreational vehicle did not have such a problem and that Domaille, another Tioga Gas Mart employee and AmeriGas were the ones that were primarily negligent.

Domaille, his wife Jane and their daughter, Denise Domaille Molnar, filed the products liability lawsuit against Cruise America and AmeriGas Inc. in January 2010. Molnar also alleged negligent infliction of emotional distress, and her mother claimed loss of consortium.

Raders recommended that Domaille receive $23 million, that $6 million be awarded to Jane Domaille and that another $4 million be awarded to the couple’s daughter.

AmeriGas provided the propane dispensing equipment at their business. The jury attributed 35 percent of the negligence causing Domaille’s injuries to the company. The jury assigned another 30 percent to Domaille for his actions and 25 percent to

Health care providers and their insurance companies have managed to persuade far too many Americans and injured parties that holding providers responsible for malpractice is a bad thing. They also claim that the number of medical malpractice claims and payments is increasing. This false presumption may deter injured parties from seeking representation and compensation for their injuries.

I simply cannot respond to the first contention.  The idea of holding people and corporations responsible for their actions does not seem to be a bad thing.

However, I can respond to the second point.

The fact is that the prevalence and cost of medical malpractice litigation was at its  lowest levels on record in 2011.

In contrast to the hundreds of thousands of annual adverse events attributable to medical mistakes, only 10,195 medical malpractice payments were made on behalf of doctors in 2011.

To put this in perspective, the number of payments made in 2011 equaled only a little more than 1 percent of the number of Medicare patients that the Department of Health and Human Services estimates suffered serious, avoidable injuries that year — and that says nothing of the hundreds of thousands or millions of non-Medicare patients who suffered serious harms due to negligence.

The problem with medical malpractice is medical malpractice.  It is not litigation holding those who commit medical malpractice accountable for their errors; its the presumption associated with medical malpractice which deterred those harmed from seeking adequate relief.

If you have been injured due to faulty medical care, do not fall victim to the false notions set forth by the medical community regarding your right to redress and relief. You have a right to superior defense and restitution; at Joey Gilbert & Associates we are committed to securing these rights for you. Trust in our experience, compassion and understanding. Contact our office at 775-473-7171.

Mathew A. Work

Associate

Joey Gilbert & Associates

-           ¿Cuál es la primera cosa debería hacer si estuviera en un choque?

Si usted ha resultado dañado de cualquier manera, la primera cosa es llamar a la policía al 911.  Deles todos los detalles de donde está ubicado.  Si no tiene daños, y el coche está ubicado en un lugar seguro, puede salir del coche y conseguir la información del otro chofer.  Trate de conseguir toda la información posible en esta situación, el nombre del chofer, el número de la placa, y la información de la compañía de seguro.  Si hay testigos, trate de conseguir su información y lo que han visto.

-          Después del choque, ¿debería quedarme en el coche?

Si le duele el cuerpo o está mareado, quédese en su vehículo.  No se mueva mucho ni cambie su posición.  Esté tranquilo.  Espere la ambulancia o a los paramédicos. No quiere tener más dolor por tratar de salir de su vehículo.  Es mejor que espere ayuda a que se levante y tenga más problemas.

Si su coche no está ubicado en un lugar seguro, analice la situación y vea si es seguro salir del coche.  Si las bolsas de aire no están desplegadas, probablemente hay polvo en el aire, pero no se apure a menos que haya humo o fuego.  Recuerde,  siempre sepa lo que está sucediendo en su situación, no quiere tener otro accidente con un auto después.    

-          Si me quedo en el coche, ¿voy a tener problemas con mi caso?

Si usted tiene dolor, vértigo, o incomodidad, quédese en el coche hasta que llegue  ayuda.

-          ¿Las fotos pueden ayudar mi caso?

Use cualquier forma de cámara que tenga y el máximo de fotos que sea posible.  La policía no siempre toma fotos, y a veces las fotos suyas son difíciles de encontrar.  Trate de tomar fotos de toda al área y de todos los vehículos en la situación.  Si hay semáforos, o señales del camino, tome fotos de todo lo que esté allí.  Cualquier cosa que pueda bloquear su vista, un coche que esté estacionado, debería tomar fotos de esos inmediatamente.  La escena puede cambiar minutos después del accidente.  También tome fotos de sus heridas inmediatamente, porque esas pueden cambiar después de días u horas, y haga lo mismo con sus pasajeros.

-          ¿Debería hablar con la policía cuando llegue?

Hablar con la policía sobre los hechos del accidente está bien.  Evite hacer declaraciones que puedan mostrar que usted es culpable del accidente.  Cualquier declaración que haga, la policía va a incluirla en el informe. 

-          ¿Cuánto tiempo tengo para hablar con las compañías de seguros, y tengo que hablar con ellos, si no soy culpable?

No es importante si usted es culpable o no, llame a su compañía de seguro inmediatamente después del choque.  Dígale los datos y deje que la compañía de seguro evalúe la situación.  Mientras tanto, contrate a su abogado defensor de lesiones personales.  

-          ¿Cuánto tiempo debería tomar antes de llamar a un abogado?

Si alguien ha sido lesionado, hable con un abogado defensor de lesiones personales para entender sus derechos en esta situación.  Tiene que recibir los consejos propios de su caso para obtener un pago justo y para evitar pagar una cuenta alta del hospital.  A pesar de todo, si usted es  la víctima o provocó el choque, siempre hable con un abogado.

-          ¿Tengo que ver un médico después de un choque, si no tengo dolor?

En cualquier accidente, debería hablar con un médico, para ver si no hay años escondidos.  Es posible que sienta un daño o dolor después de días, por eso es importante hacer una cita con un médico.    Usted no es un médico, así que no se evalúe  así mismo, deje este trabajo al médico.   

-          ¿Hablo con la compañía de seguro del otro chofer?

Es mejor cuando usted tiene un abogado defensor de lesiones personales de Reno que pueda hablar con las compañías de seguro.  Es posible que pueda hacer su caso peor por hablar con la otra compañía de seguro, ellos son expertos en su campo de trabajo y saben como hacer preguntas que muestren que usted tiene la culpa.

-          No llevaba mi cinturón de seguridad, ¿ellos pueden usar eso contra mí?   

En Nevada, una persona que no lleva su cinturón de seguridad, aún si es la víctima, puede recibir menos dinero que una persona lo que llevaba.  ¡Pues use su cinturón de seguridad!

-          La otra parte interesada quiere mis archivos, ¿se los debería dar a ellos?

No, ¡absolutamente no! Solamente comparta sus archivos con su propio abogado.  Puede perder su caso por hacer eso con la otra compañía de seguro, hable con su abogado inmediatamente cuando alguien quiera su información.

-          Si presento una denuncia, ¿vamos a hacer un acuerdo afuera de la corte?

Depende, a menudo los casos pueden llegar a un acuerdo sin demasiado pleito.  Sin embargo, eso totalmente depende en la oferta que la compañía de seguro tenga sobre la mesa, si no es justo, vamos a avanzar más en su caso, posiblemente haya un juicio. 

-          ¿Puedo realizar este proceso solo?

Siempre hable con un médico sobre sus heridas, y asegúrese de que todas sus cuentas médicas hayan sido pagadas, como asimismo su tiempo perdido de trabajo.  Si hace un acuerdo temprano, es posible que pueda tener más cuentas en al fin, lo que no quería en el principio.

-          Pienso que soy culpable del choque, ¿qué hago?

A pesar de que haya causado el choque, o tenga una parte de la culpa, es mejor que un experto pueda ver los datos e informes.  Hay muchos factores en un choque, como el clima, el alcohol, los defectos de máquinas, etc…. Es importante que no diga que usted es culpable en su declaración, cualquier declaración que haga va estar en la corte un día, eso es seguro. 

-          ¿Cuánto tiempo tengo para reclamar el pleito por lesiones personales antes de que pierda el derecho de hacerlo?

En General, en Nevada tiene dos años para presentar su caso.  Sin embargo, no quiere esperar hasta el último minuto, pueden surgir problemas después de tiempo.   Tiene que contratar a un abogado defensor de lesiones personales de Reno   para hablar sobre su caso. 

-          ¿Cuánto cuesta hablarle a un abogado sobre mi situación? 

NADA…………………  Si usted o un ser querido ha sido lesionado en un accidente, llame a Joey Gilbert y Asociados, Ltda., para su consulta gratis.  Llame 1-888-640-4313 o 1-775-473-7171, se habla español.

-         What is the first thing I should do if I am in a car accident?

If you are hurt in any way, the first thing you should do is call 911.  Give as much detail as possible for your location. If you are not hurt, and the car is in a safe location, you can get out of the car and get the other driver’s information.  Try and get as much information as possible such as driver’s name, license plate number and most importantly, insurance information. If there are any witnesses try and get their information also and find out what they saw. 

-         After the accident, should I stay in the car?

If you feel any pain or dizziness, stay in your vehicle.  Try not to move too much or to change your position.  Try and stay calm.  Wait for the ambulance and paramedics to arrive before moving.  You don’t want to aggravate an injury by trying to get out of your vehicle.  It is better to wait for help to arrive than risk being permanently disabled.

If your car is not in a safe location, look around and exit the car if it is safe to do so and get to a safe location as quickly as possible.  If the airbags have deployed, there may be a little haze in the car, but there is no need to rush to exit the vehicle unless you smell smoke or see fire.  Remember to always check your surroundings when exiting your car so that you don’t get hit by oncoming traffic. 

-         If I stay in the car will it hurt my case?

If you feel any pain, discomfort or dizziness after the accident, staying in the vehicle until help arrives is perfectly fine.

-         Will taking pictures help my case?

Absolutely.  If you have any form of camera, take as many pictures as you can of the scene.  Police do not always take pictures and those pictures may be difficult to locate.  Try and take pictures of all vehicles as well as the area around the scene.  If there are signal lights, stop signs or any other road signs that are in the area take pictures of those as well.  Anything that may obstruct view, even a parked car should be taken immediately.  The scene may look different several weeks later or even hours later.  Also be sure to take pictures of any injuries at the time of the accident and follow up with new ones several days later as bruises develop.  Do the same for any passengers in the vehicle.

-         Should I talk to the police when they arrive?

Talking to the police about the facts of the accident is ok.  Avoid making any statements that would indicate that you were at fault in the accident.  Any statements that you make to the police will likely be included in an accident report. 

-         How soon after an accident should I contact my insurance company? Do I even need to contact them, if I wasn’t at fault?

Whether or not you were at fault, contact your insurance company as soon as possible after the accident. Stick to the facts and let the insurance company evaluate them. Meanwhile, hiring a personal injury attorney could be very important.

-         How soon after an accident should I contact an attorney?

If anyone is injured or has the possibility of being injured, contact a Reno personal injury attorney as soon as possible to understand your rights and the best way to proceed. Getting proper legal advice early in your case can make the difference between you receiving a just payout and being responsible for pay high medical bill.  Regardless of whether you are the victim or the cause of the accident, you should always speak to an attorney.

-         Should I see a doctor after an accident even if I don’t feel any pain?

Anytime you are in an accident you should consider seeing a medical professional to make sure there are no hidden injuries. You may not feel the effects of an injury for several days. Scheduling a doctor’s visit the day of an accident is a wise precaution. When you do see the doctor, make sure to mention any complaint you may have, no matter how minor. Don’t play medical expert and evaluate the importance of a symptom. Let the doctor do his/her job.

-         Should I contact the other driver’s insurance company?

It is much better to have a Reno personal injury attorney communicate with the other driver’s insurance company.  You may end up hurting your claim more than helping by speaking to their insurance.  Insurance companies have a way that they twist your words and will then use it against you later on to provide you with a lower payout than you deserve.  You may even make a statement that the insurance company uses to bar you from any recovery!

-         I wasn’t wearing my seatbelt when my car accident occurred. Can this be held against me in a suit for damages?

In Nevada, a person who is not wearing their seatbelt when they are the victim of a car accident often receives less of a recovery than someone who was wearing their seatbelt. Buckle Up!

-         The other driver’s insurance is requesting that I release my medical records.  Should I?

Absolutely not! Do not release your health information to anyone other than YOUR attorney.  You could lose your case by providing your medical information to the other driver’s insurance.  Contact an attorney as soon as possible if anyone requests your medical records.

-         If I file a personal injury claim, will we settle out of court or go to trial?

It depends.  Often cases settle without the need for extensive litigation.  However, this depends largely on whether the insurance company provides a settlement figure that we feel is fair to you and your claim.  Every personal injury claim is different and depends on the individual facts of the case.  If the insurance company is denying liability or not offering a fair settlement, the case may have to go to trial.

-         Can I settle the auto accident claim on my own if I feel fine?

It is always best to go see a doctor to make sure there are no hidden injuries.  You want to ensure that all your medical bills and loss of work are paid for.  If you settle to early you may end up stuck with additional bills that you wouldn’t have been responsible if you waited.

-         I think that I caused the accident, What do I do?

Even though you may think that you caused the accident, or are partially at fault, it is always best to have an expert look at the facts and the reports.  There are many factors that may contribute to the accident such as weather, manufacturing defects, alcohol etc. Make sure you do not make any statements that you are at fault at the scene of the accident.  Any statements you make to the other party or the police will most likely be brought up with the insurance company. 

-         How soon must I file a personal injury lawsuit before I lose the right to do so?

In Nevada you usually have 2 years to file your lawsuit.  However, you don’t want to wait until the last minute as issues may arise that could cause you problems.  You should contact a Reno accident attorney as soon as possible to discuss the proper way to handle your case.

-         How much does it cost to speak with you about my situation?

Nothing……….If you or a loved one is injured in an accident, call Joey Gilbert & Associates, Ltd. today for a free confidential consultation – 775-473-7171 or Toll Free 1-888-640-4313.  Never a fee unless we win your case!  Se Habla Español.

Durante los días de vacaciones hay más accidentes con los peatones en los estacionamientos. En algunos casos,  estos se deben a las condiciones peligrosas del clima.   En otros casos, los choferes que se apuran también pueden ser culpables de accidentes al retroceder.

Los abogados privados de lesiones personales y el equipo de Joey Gilbert y Asociados, Ltda. quieren que usted tenga días de vacaciones muy seguros y agradables.  Por favor mire dos veces cuando esté en el estacionamiento y siempre cuide a sus niños.

El gobierno federal dice que los viejitos también corren riesgos de accidentes de autos en los estacionamientos.  De hecho, el departamento de transporte de los EE.UU. propondrá nuevos estándares más rígidos para el diseño de vehículos de pasajeros.

“Los niños no corren más peligro en una entrada sino cuando los padres o los abuelos están retrocediendo,” dice la secretaria de transportación Ray LaHood.  “Hoy en día con los cambios que nos proponemos, vamos a ayudar a todos los chóferes en la manera de ver los puntos ciegos, para asegurarnos que sea seguro para los niños y los peatones.”

Hay nuevas reglas que requieren un campo de visión más amplio para todos los vehículos de pasajeros.   El gobierno cree que la empresa automovilística cumplirá con esto, poniendo cámaras y monitores detrás de todos los nuevos coches en el futuro para el 2014.

“Los pasos que estamos siguiendo hoy, van a reducir muchos de los accidentes y fatalidades con los ancianos, niños y otros peatones,” dice el administrador de NHTSA David Strickland.  “mientras esos cambios van a mostrar una diferencia, los chóferes tienen que recordar que la tecnología no es un reemplazo de la atención al manejar.  Siempre preste atención en donde está, y donde sus niños están ubicados, antes de que empiece a retroceder.”

Cerca de 300 fatalidades y 18,000 heridos ocurren cada año como un  resultado de accidentes con gente que retrocede en sus autos.  Casi todas las víctimas son niños bajo la edad de 5 años.   Una tercera parte de los accidentes ocurre con los ancianos.

La administración de seguridad de la patrulla de la autopista nacional informa que 56 personas murieron en accidentes peatonales en 2008 y los números están aumentando cada año.

Si usted o un ser querido ha sido lesionado en un choque, llame a Joey Gilbert y Asociados hoy mismo para una consulta gratis, que es confidencial. -775-473-7171 o 1 888-640-4313.  ¡No paga si no ganamos su caso!  ¡Se habla español.

Reno pedestrian accidents and parking lot accidents are a danger during the busy holiday shopping season. In some cases, premise liability issues can result in dangerous conditions. In other cases, motorists in a hurry can be at-fault in backover accidents.

The Reno personal injury lawyers and the staff at Joey Gilbert & Associates, Ltd wish you a safe and enjoyable holiday season. Please look twice in parking lots and keep a hand on small children.

The federal government reports the elderly are also at increased risk of pedestrian accidents and backover accidents. In fact, the issue has prompted the U.S. Department of Transportation to propose tough new standards for the design of passenger vehicles.

“There is no more tragic accident than for a parent or caregiver to back out of a garage or driveway and kill or injure an undetected child playing behind the vehicle,” said Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. “The changes we are proposing today will help drivers see into those blind zones directly behind vehicles to make sure it is safe to back up.”

The new rules require an expanded field of vision for all passenger vehicles. The government believes the auto industry will most likely comply by installing rearview cameras and dash monitors in all new cars by 2014.

“The steps we are taking today will help reduce back-over fatalities and injuries not only to children, but to the elderly, and other pedestrians,” said NHTSA Administrator David Strickland. “And while these changes will make a difference, drivers must remember that no technology can, or should, replace full attention and vigilance when backing up. Always know where your children are before you start your car and make sure you check that there is no one behind you before you back up.”

The government estimates nearly 300 fatalities and 18,000 injuries occur each year as a result of backover accidents. Nearly half of all victims are children under the age of 5. One-third of such crashes involve the elderly.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reports 56 people were killed in Nevada pedestrian accidents in 2008 and the numbers have continued to increase over the last few years.

If you or a loved one is injured or in an accident, call Joey Gilbert & Associates today for a free confidential consultation – 775-473-7171 or Toll Free 1-888-640-4313.  Never a fee unless we win your case!  Se Habla Español.

Felonies are typically the most serious crimes in any system of criminal law. A standard definition of a felony is any crime punishable by more than one year in prison or by death. This means that any crime that has a sentence of only a fine or confinement in the local jail is not a felony. Often the offense itself is not labeled as a felony, but the punishment tells the public that the offense is a felony. On the other hand, state codes may label a crime a “gross” or “aggravated” misdemeanor but provide for a sentence of more than one year in the state penitentiary system, thereby ensuring that the so-called misdemeanor is treated as felony in many respects.

If a crime is a felony, additional criminal procedures apply. The right to a court-appointed attorney in cases where the defendant is too poor to afford to hire a lawyer is usually triggered if the charge is a felony, but not for less-serious crimes. Likewise, whether or not a criminal defendant must be present in court for various parts of the process may depend on whether he or she is charged with a felony.

In some jurisdictions, felonies can only be charged upon a grand jury indictment, while lesser crimes can be charged by a written information. Criminal defendants and witnesses can have their testimony disregarded in some jurisdictions by showing a prior conviction for a felony but not for a lesser crime. Finally, many jurisdictions base their “three strikes” laws on felonies but not misdemeanors. If the offender has been twice convicted of a felony, one more felony conviction will subject him to life in prison.
In addition to differences in procedural criminal law, the substantive law can be affected if a crime is designated a felony. Some statutes make an accidental death a murder if it occurs in the commission of a felony, but if it occurs in the commission of a lesser crime, it is only manslaughter. Burglary is defined at common law as breaking and entering a house for the purpose of committing a felony; if the purpose was not to commit a felony the crime cannot be charged as burglary.

The crime of conspiracy may carry a harsher penalty if the offense is conspiracy to commit a felony rather than conspiracy to commit a misdemeanor. Justifiable homicide is sometimes described as a killing to prevent the commission of a felony, although more commonly it is limited to prevention of certain of the most serious felonies.

A person convicted of a felony may have more restrictions on their rights than a person convicted of a lesser crime. In many jurisdictions, felons cannot serve on juries. Often times they lose their right to vote or to practice certain professions, such as lawyer or teacher. Felons may be prohibited from owning guns or serving in the military. Some states have a “three strikes, you’re out” statute which provides that a person who already has been convicted of two felonies may be sentenced to life in prison if he or she is convicted of a third felony.

If you are facing charges in Reno or Lake Tahoe, contact Joey Gilbert & Associates, Ltd to discuss your rights. Call 775-473-7171 or 1-888-640-4313 today for a free confidential consultation. Live receptionist 24/7. Se Habla Espanol.

To understand tort reform, one must understand the definition of a tort. Simply put, a tort is a non-criminal civil wrong that is caused either on purpose or through negligence. Or, to put it another way, torts are civil cases in which an act, intentional or otherwise, has caused injury (physical, mental or monetary). In such cases where a tort is committed, the injured party has the right to sue the wrongdoer for damages.

Tort reform isn’t one single idea or law. It is not partisan in its political nature and has proponent and opponent in each political affiliation. Instead, it’s a group of ideas and laws designed to change the way our civil justice system works.

Once the definition of tort law is known, understanding tort reform becomes much easier. Tort reform is essentially any attempt to limit someone’s rights to seek redress in a court of law for a civil wrong.

The most common form of tort reform is the placement of limitations on the amount that can be sought through a civil suit. For example, a particular medical malpractice case may only allow the injured party to claim a maximum of $100,000. Placing a statute of limitations on the amount of time a person has to file a claim is another example of tort reform; this particular aspect of tort reform has a significant effect on the rights of mesothelioma victims to seek financial compensation for their exposure.

In a nutshell, tort reform proponents seek to limit the liabilities of negligent and knowingly injurious parties. As of now tort reform is a state specific issue. However, it is important to consider the impact if could have on the legal landscape if it becomes a federally mandated authority.   An expereienced Reno attorney can make all the difference.

If you or a loved one is injured or in an accident, call Joey Gilbert & Associates today for a free confidential consultation – 775-473-7171 or Toll Free 1-888-640-4313.  Never a fee unless we win your case!  Se Habla Español.

On the last day of 2011, President Obama signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act. (NDAA).

The signing of the bill alone is hardly an unusual occurrence; the National Defense Authorization Act itself has been signed into law every year for nearly the past fifty. The purpose of the bill in the past and today is to allow the government to continue funding national security interests and the military for the next fiscal year.

This year’s bill, however, was different. One of the provisions included in the 2012 NDAA is one that allows for American citizens suspected of terrorism to be indefinitely detained in military custody without charge or trial. The President now has authority to detain, via the Armed Forces, any person “who was part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners,” or anyone who commits a “belligerent act” against the U.S. or its coalition allies, under the law of war, “without trial, until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists passed in the immediate aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks. The text also sanctions trial by military tribunal, or “transfer to the custody or control of the person’s country of origin,” or transfer to “any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity.”

The Obama administration had threatened to veto the bill as long as it contained the indefinite detention provision, but changed course shortly before the final version was voted on by Congress.

In a letter to the public released following the signing of the document, Obama explained why he signed the bill with the indefinite detention provision attached to it. He states that his signature on the bill is necessary to continue funding for military and national security interests. Of the indefinite detention provision, he says that the version of the bill he signed had been revised to eliminate any provisions that would threaten the freedom of American citizens.

The bill ultimately provides the military with extraordinary powers to detain American citizens without providing them with a trial. This is amplified by the fact that American citizens who are being investigated for being suspected of terrorism are not allowed to inform other about the investigation without facing prosecution as per provisions of the Patriot Act. Coupled with the NDAA, a citizen wrongly suspected of terrorist activities could now theoretically be held in military detention for months without trial, and be released only to be restricted from taking legal action against those who arrested him.

The implications of this legislation reflect the idea that certain liberties and freedoms must be sacrificed in the name of protecting the country from further terrorist attack, a notion that is widely disputed by various groups concerned with civil liberties.

The signing of this year’s NDAA has been combated in a statement released by the ACLU, which says that the bill  “violates international law because it is not limited to people captured in the context of an actual armed conflict as required by the laws of war.”

This, and the broader topic of how to preserve liberty while countering possible terrorist threats, will surely be a major question for the contenders of the 2012 election to handle. The discussion prompted by the signing of the NDAA touches upon the issue of how the U.S. government is expected to respect the Bill of Rights while maintaining the country’s security by diffusing threats in a preventative manner.

One of the other provisions of the bill is said to make the closing of Guantanamo Bay more difficult, as it restricts the transfer of cleared detainees from the facility for resettlement and repatriation purposes.

Overall, the signing of the NDAA leaves us with the impression that President Obama has shown few significant differences from the Bush administration in terms of post-9/11 national security policy. The Patriot Act was renewed by Obama earlier this year, the Guantanamo Bay detention center remains open, and now the recently-signed NDAA has extended the powers of the military to include the detainment of American citizens indefinitely without trial.