On October 28, 2009, Congress passed the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010.Finally, even if the Administration should prove successful in moving detainees to the United States, America’s enemies and those who oppose the law of war detention would likely shift their criticism from Guantanamo to the new locus of detention, undercutting one of the main arguments made in favor of closing the facility in the first place.Before analyzing Section 1032, it is important to provide some context for the Senate amendment and the Obama Administration’s Guantanamo Bay detention policy.Whether the Administration will be able to close Guantanamo Bay by January 2017 is also an open question.The answer depends, in part, on how the word “close” is defined; even if the vast majority of detainees are transferred off the island, it is more than likely that military commission proceedings will continue.Those meaningful reforms of military commissions became the Military Commissions Act of 2009. Sixteen days later, on November 13, 2009, then-Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the five Guantanamo terrorists responsible for the 9/11 attacks would be brought to New York to face a criminal trial in federal district court. Politicians from both parties objected vigorously, including Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer and Republican Representative Peter King, both from New York. As if those moves did not poison the relationship between the Obama Administration and Congress enough with respect to Guantanamo, on December 15, 2009, President Obama issued a Presidential Memorandum to the Attorney General and Secretary of Defense to purchase the state-run Thomson Correctional Facility in Thomson, Illinois, for the express purpose of housing Guantanamo detainees. The controversial move produced another political backlash against the Administration.Even Obama’s diehard supporter from Illinois, Democratic Senator Dick Durbin, who at first supported the move, withdrew his support when it became “politically impossible.” As a result of these moves, Congress began to include a provision in annual appropriations or defense authorization enactments that barred the use of funds to construct or modify a facility in the United States to house detainees who remain under the custody or control of the Department of Defense. The closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention center did not have to unfold in such a contentious fashion.C., asking to be released and claiming that unless the government could prove to a federal judge that they are indeed unprivileged enemy belligerents, the court must grant the writ.Most detainees have lost their habeas cases because they are in fact unprivileged enemy belligerents.The conference meeting has occurred, but no resolution has been reached.Moreover, even if the amendment survives and is signed into law, Congress may not vote to approve the Administration’s closure plan if Members do not believe it is sufficiently detailed or contains adequate national security measures.