The correct answer is: violation of individual liberties, and the violation of the national and international laws.
As much as the government has plausible for doing it so, as we look back at the history of terrorist attacks, the government would argue the indefinite detention without, considering it aa form of prevention. If we know the human rights we will realize the most viable and obvious argument for being against that type of detention is the violation of national and international laws about the individual liberties. That's when there is no evidence of crime and when the individual does not represent national threat. It may be controversial the way government tries to deal with issues like that, but international organizations has made very clear their points about
Two things that the Radical Republicans insisted be part of their Reconstruction plan was that the military would stay in the South to supervise the transition, and that the newly freed slaves would be offered all the freedoms of whites in the South.
Senator J. William Fulbright built support for doves in Congress
by holding hearings that provided a platform for war critics to build support
against the war in Congress. Senator Fulbright challenged the testimony of
administration officials in televised Senate hearings on Vietnam.
The First Continental Congress was prompted by the Coercive Acts, known in America as the Intolerable Acts, which Parliament passed in early 1774 to reassert its dominance over the American colonies following the Boston Tea Party.
