10 U.S.C. § 1025

REQUIREMENT FOR NATIONAL SECURITY PROTOCOLS GOVERNING DETAINEE COMMUNICATIONS.

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 10 CasesGoogle Scholar

“(a)In General.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 31, 2011], the Secretary of Defense shall develop and submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a national security protocol governing communications to and from individuals detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note), and related issues.“(b)Contents.—The protocol developed pursuant to subsection (a) shall include Department of Defense policies and procedures regarding each of the following:“(1) Detainee access to military or civilian legal representation, or both, including any limitations on such access and the manner in which any applicable legal privileges will be balanced with national security considerations.“(2) Detainee communications with persons other than Federal Government personnel and members of the Armed Forces, including meetings, mail, phone calls, and video teleconferences, including—“(A) any limitations on categories of information that may be discussed or materials that may be shared; and“(B) the process by which such communications or materials are to be monitored or reviewed.“(3) The extent to which detainees may receive visits by persons other than military or civilian representatives.“(4) The measures planned to be taken to implement and enforce the provisions of the protocol.“(c)Updates.—The Secretary of Defense shall notify the congressional defense committees of any significant change to the policies and procedures described in the protocol submitted pursuant to subsection (a) not later than 30 days after such change is made.“(d)Form of Protocol.—The protocol submitted pursuant to subsection (a) may be submitted in classified form.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 2020–2020 · leading case: Stephen H. Bafford v. Northrop Grumman Corp. (C.D. Cal. 2020).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Stephen H. Bafford v. Northrop Grumman Corp. (C.D. Cal. 2020). “29 10 U.S.C. § 1025 (a)(1)(B)(i)–(ii). However, “[u]sing an interactive website to make a 11 request for a pension statement does not amount to a written request under ERISA § 12 105, 29 U.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.