Troops Deployed Under Posse Comitatus and The Insurrection Act?

[Daryl Hunt]

Here is something to think about. History versus current times
(LegalEagle’s Law Review)

If the rioting and looting continues, with people dying of the ANTIFA and BLM movement, there is a plan that can be enabled not only to have the insurrections use of the military, but the end of elections until such time all insurrections are ended.

Martial Law

Martial law on the national level may be declared by Congress or the president. Under Article I, Section 8, Clause 15, of the Constitution, Congress has the power "[t]o provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel Invasions." Article II, Section 2, Clause 1, of the Constitution declares that "[t]he President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States." Neither constitutional provision includes a direct reference to martial law.

So keep up the occupation of Seattle, resist the police, burn cities, and by Nov 3rd, all elections will be suspended, and President Trump stays in power. You can thank your spineless liberal politicians who really like the President by having your out there keeping up the violence....

Let's address the election first. If Rump were to delay the elections past Jan 20 at 12 Noon 2021, he would no longer be the President and Pence would no longer be the VP. They are both under a 4 year contract. Not a second past Jan 20, Noon, 2021. It would go to the next successor until the election could be done. Are you aware that the next series of Successors are all Democrats? And it wouldn't be Nancy either since She will be up for election as well. Hey, this might be a great idea. It would get rid of even Moscow Mitch as well. The Governors would have to appoint the Congress and guess what, the Dem Governors outnumber the Republican Governors. So it wouldn't turn out the way you think it would.

Denver had looting and rioting the first night. It caught everyone by surprise. Day two, the Colorado National Guard and the full brunt of the LEs were on the streets. The Organization that is driving the Looting and Rioting decided to hit an easier city. This was done by a Democratic Mayor and a Homosexual Democratic Governor. Just because a city is run by a given Political leaning Mayor doesn't mean that all Democrat Mayors and Governors are going to let it happen.

Rump had the power to mobilize the 82nd, he just didn't have the power to turn them into a Police Force. That was already tried in Iraq and they learned that the 82nd can't police anything other than cigarette butts. They are trained to break things and kill, not to keep the peace. Rump blew it big time. Luckily, someone in the chain of command had better sense.

You are wrong, if Martial Law is declared the president remains in office until the insurrection ends. So please keep burning cities and murdering innocent people...Long live President Trump....You do realize that it is within his power to call up the militia, which is about 200 million armed very pissed off citizens. Who do you think they are going to go after?

Here are three methods that might be used.

1. The States do not have to have an election for the Federal Positions at all. In the case of a delayed election past Jan 20, the Governors can select the Electoral College for each state. They will do that before Jan 6. On Jan 6, the EC will vote and be tallied and the winners of the President and the VP will be announced. The EC will be voting blind so it's a crap shoot.

2, The Governors decide not to use the EC at all. They wait until Jan 20 NOON and then each state selects the open positions in Congress and they fill it. At that point, the House selects the President and the Senate selects the VP. The problem the republicans have is, there are more Democrat Governors than Republican Governors and that pretty much means both the PRez and the VP will be Democrat.

3. If the election is delayed past Noon Jan 20, the Speaker of the House becomes President unless the Speaker also was up for reelection. Then it would pass to the next person in the chain. This time around, it would end up Senate ProTem who is a Democrat. I suggest you read something you seem to be ignoring.

Only the first option would make it mean that Rump could be reelected. Pretty much, the other 2 means that the best case for Republicans would be to keep the VP spot as long as they retained the Senate Majority.

It's the Constitution of the United States. To be specific, the 20th Amendment. I can see why the Congress is resolved on the 3rd day of Jan. If the Presidential and the VP is not resolved by Jan 20, then Congress will vote to appoint the next President. Just for argument sake, let's say that the election is postponed past Jan 3 so the Governors will select the replacements for the seats that are pending. And all seats that are up for election will be considered open. If the election is postponed past Jan 20 Noon, then the House selects the President and the Senate selects the President. It would be a strange mix of Biden and Pence.

Amendment XX
Section 1.
The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

Section 2.
The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

Sorry you Rumpsters, things don't go the way your fantasies dictate in the real world. In otherwords, I am sure that at least one advisor for Rump will tie Rump to a chair and hammer this into his head.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Thank you for that very good legal explanation of the "posse comitatus act" and the "Insurrection Act".
Powell and the generals are wrong.
Trump is absolutely right to use the military to protect citizens from rioters.

The laws were written as if they were to be done by a sane person. Obviously, when they were written, the congress never met Rump. Plus, it's merkie at best in what a President can do without the permission of the Governor or in the case of DC, the Mayor with Federal Military Troops. Can you imagine if a President were to send Federal Troops to a state to have those troops to be met by State Organized Militia (State Defense) troops? There are a few of the states with the SDF that are NOT controlled nor can they be Federalized by the Federal Government. Sounds to me like more SDFs (State Defense Force) needs to created across the nation. This is the very reason that the 2nd amendment was created.

What you just said is plain wrong.
1. Trump does NOT need approval from governors or mayors to protect US citizens from rioters/insurrectionists.
2. Kennedy sent in troops to integrate schools over the objections of governors.
3. No state militia or police force would ever oppose US combat forces, that would be suicide, and they are not stupid.
4. All state forces, such as the national guard, can be commanded by the president instead of governors, i.e. they can be Federalized.
5. Your last sentence has to do with "militias". No militia would oppose US combat troops. Most of the militias are ex-military, whose sons are active duty. Sounds like you're an antifa wannabe??

Let's start out with Item 5. In Texas, every Fire Fighter, State Police and even Local Law Enforcement are automatically in the SDF. Only a small percentage have served in the Military.

Item 4: According to the 1916/17 National Guard Act, only those that are eligible can be recalled. For instance, I got recalled the first year of my Military Retirement to go count NBC Pallets. Not to do the work, but to supervise it. When Desert Storm ended, I went back home. I was eligible for recall for 10 years. After that time period, I could only be recalled for something like a World War until Age 65. For someone with less than 20 (not normal retirement) the recall is for 4 years. When the 4 year expires they are no longer eligible for recall to active duty. That means that only a very small number of the SDF can be recalled. The Governor also has the option to call up those Ex Military that are outside of the Federal Recall range. Meaning, the Feds will probably be outnumbered by quite a margin. And, outside of heavy tanks, many Police Forces have quite a few Armored vehicles.

Item 3: Care to reread the 2nd Amendment again? Chances are, it won't be just one state that the Feds will be facing. It will be considered a Tyranical Invasion that if the Feds do it in one state then they will do it to other states. Any President that forces that issue won't last the afternoon in office.

We'll take item 1 and 2 together. The ONLY time a President has resorted to this has been when the Governor has been severely tromping on citizens civil rights. The Governor has the ability to call up the National Guard, the SDF and the LE in full force if he thinks it's necessary to protect the Citizens rights. Some were a little slow to react but it's getting done without the need of Federal Troops. The conditions for the President to order Federal Troops into the cities to do the LE's job just fell under why the 2nd amendment was adopted in the first place.

1/2. I think we kind of agree, that a president can send the US Army in if a governor is not following US law, and citizens' rights are being violated. The Insurrection Act was amended to give the president wide discretion on the use of troops if/when needed. I can see where generals Powell, Kelly, Mattis, and others don't want to send the military in to "suppress insurrections", but IMHO it needs to be done since the mayor won't send in cops, and the governor won't send in their National Guard. The people and businesses in those cordoned off blocks are being deprived of their rights, Trump needs to restore Law & Order.

3. We disagree on the 2nd Amendment. Half the militias would be on one side and half on the other. If Trump sends troops into Seattle to remove the insurgents, I'm not seeing any militia members that would take up arms to oppose the US troops. The insurgents can have guns as per the 2nd Amendment, but my money's on the Army.

4. I'm not talking "recall" I'm talking who commands the state's National Guard forces. In Texas its a little complicated. Some groups are commanded by the governor, and some by the DOD; Texas Military Forces - Wikipedia
Texas Military Forces exist under civilian control. Since 1903, Texas Military Forces are authorized by Title 32 of the United States Code and Article 4 of the Texas Constitution to "execute the laws of the State, to suppress insurrections, and to repel invasions."[23][24] Texas Army National Guard and Texas Air National Guard units are also subject to Title 10 of the United States Code, which legally empowers the United States government to mobilize them when more resources are needed than available in the United States Armed Forces for war, national emergency, or national security.[25] Under Title 10, operations are conducted under command of the United States Department of Defense by the Secretary of Defense.

It's more complicated than that. You will notice that no State legally calls their own forces Guards even if that is what they are. Only the National Guard can use that term. So they created another term for the State only forces called State Defense Force. It's what the old State Guard was before the 1916/17 National Guard Act. The only way that the Feds can call the SDF up that are not subject to military conventional callup is to reinstate the draft. Otherwise, the ones that are outside the recall time period or have never served cannot be called up to the Federal Military. But the ones within the reserve period of 4 and 10 years can.

It's a bit of a stretch to call the looting and rioting an Insurrection. That X block area in Seattle comes close but no where else does it rate. And if the Mayor and Governor handles it, it's not an insurrection. But the President MUST give prior notice before sending in the Federal Troops. And the only time the Feds can be sent in is if the Governor either fails or the Governor requests them. Like the Governor of California did for the LA riots when those 4 cops were found innocent in the Rodney King Beating. And Yes, Congress had to approve it which took just about an hour. Posse Comitatus Act was observed. The other times was when the State Government was directly denying Citizens their 1st amendment rights.

The problem with sending in the 82nd, you will notice the wording Rump used. He used past tense. I have Sent, not I am willing to send. The President must announce that he's willing to send in the troops first. Those troops fell under the Posse Comitatus Act and could not be used. They did not meet the requirements of the Insurrection Act. Rump got burnt on that one trying to do whatever the hell he wanted. It was an illegal order and the Military was well within their rights to refuse to follow that order according to their own UCMJ.

Just for argument sake, it's say that the Washington Governor cannot handle the X blocks of walled in armed area or elects not to handle it. In that case, Rump can make the announcement that he is ready do send in Federal Troops to quell it. He has to announce it before he actually starts deploying the troops. This gives the State the time and leverage to handle the situation. Yes, you are right, sending the 82nd into that situation isn't going to be pretty. I spent a lot of time around the 82nd and they NEVER did anything pretty. Lots of broken, smashed and dead things but nothing pretty. They are, by far, the worst Peace Keeping Force that has ever been tried to be used in the history of mankind. But, damned, they can fight.

I can see you have the States Rights entwined with the Federals. The wording may look similar but they are completely different. The Governor has a lot more leeway than the President does.

 

[kyzr]

Thank you for that very good legal explanation of the "posse comitatus act" and the "Insurrection Act".
Powell and the generals are wrong.
Trump is absolutely right to use the military to protect citizens from rioters.

The laws were written as if they were to be done by a sane person. Obviously, when they were written, the congress never met Rump. Plus, it's merkie at best in what a President can do without the permission of the Governor or in the case of DC, the Mayor with Federal Military Troops. Can you imagine if a President were to send Federal Troops to a state to have those troops to be met by State Organized Militia (State Defense) troops? There are a few of the states with the SDF that are NOT controlled nor can they be Federalized by the Federal Government. Sounds to me like more SDFs (State Defense Force) needs to created across the nation. This is the very reason that the 2nd amendment was created.

What you just said is plain wrong.
1. Trump does NOT need approval from governors or mayors to protect US citizens from rioters/insurrectionists.
2. Kennedy sent in troops to integrate schools over the objections of governors.
3. No state militia or police force would ever oppose US combat forces, that would be suicide, and they are not stupid.
4. All state forces, such as the national guard, can be commanded by the president instead of governors, i.e. they can be Federalized.
5. Your last sentence has to do with "militias". No militia would oppose US combat troops. Most of the militias are ex-military, whose sons are active duty. Sounds like you're an antifa wannabe??

Let's start out with Item 5. In Texas, every Fire Fighter, State Police and even Local Law Enforcement are automatically in the SDF. Only a small percentage have served in the Military.

Item 4: According to the 1916/17 National Guard Act, only those that are eligible can be recalled. For instance, I got recalled the first year of my Military Retirement to go count NBC Pallets. Not to do the work, but to supervise it. When Desert Storm ended, I went back home. I was eligible for recall for 10 years. After that time period, I could only be recalled for something like a World War until Age 65. For someone with less than 20 (not normal retirement) the recall is for 4 years. When the 4 year expires they are no longer eligible for recall to active duty. That means that only a very small number of the SDF can be recalled. The Governor also has the option to call up those Ex Military that are outside of the Federal Recall range. Meaning, the Feds will probably be outnumbered by quite a margin. And, outside of heavy tanks, many Police Forces have quite a few Armored vehicles.

Item 3: Care to reread the 2nd Amendment again? Chances are, it won't be just one state that the Feds will be facing. It will be considered a Tyranical Invasion that if the Feds do it in one state then they will do it to other states. Any President that forces that issue won't last the afternoon in office.

We'll take item 1 and 2 together. The ONLY time a President has resorted to this has been when the Governor has been severely tromping on citizens civil rights. The Governor has the ability to call up the National Guard, the SDF and the LE in full force if he thinks it's necessary to protect the Citizens rights. Some were a little slow to react but it's getting done without the need of Federal Troops. The conditions for the President to order Federal Troops into the cities to do the LE's job just fell under why the 2nd amendment was adopted in the first place.

1/2. I think we kind of agree, that a president can send the US Army in if a governor is not following US law, and citizens' rights are being violated. The Insurrection Act was amended to give the president wide discretion on the use of troops if/when needed. I can see where generals Powell, Kelly, Mattis, and others don't want to send the military in to "suppress insurrections", but IMHO it needs to be done since the mayor won't send in cops, and the governor won't send in their National Guard. The people and businesses in those cordoned off blocks are being deprived of their rights, Trump needs to restore Law & Order.

3. We disagree on the 2nd Amendment. Half the militias would be on one side and half on the other. If Trump sends troops into Seattle to remove the insurgents, I'm not seeing any militia members that would take up arms to oppose the US troops. The insurgents can have guns as per the 2nd Amendment, but my money's on the Army.

4. I'm not talking "recall" I'm talking who commands the state's National Guard forces. In Texas its a little complicated. Some groups are commanded by the governor, and some by the DOD; Texas Military Forces - Wikipedia
Texas Military Forces exist under civilian control. Since 1903, Texas Military Forces are authorized by Title 32 of the United States Code and Article 4 of the Texas Constitution to "execute the laws of the State, to suppress insurrections, and to repel invasions."[23][24] Texas Army National Guard and Texas Air National Guard units are also subject to Title 10 of the United States Code, which legally empowers the United States government to mobilize them when more resources are needed than available in the United States Armed Forces for war, national emergency, or national security.[25] Under Title 10, operations are conducted under command of the United States Department of Defense by the Secretary of Defense.

It's more complicated than that. You will notice that no State legally calls their own forces Guards even if that is what they are. Only the National Guard can use that term. So they created another term for the State only forces called State Defense Force. It's what the old State Guard was before the 1916/17 National Guard Act. The only way that the Feds can call the SDF up that are not subject to military conventional callup is to reinstate the draft. Otherwise, the ones that are outside the recall time period or have never served cannot be called up to the Federal Military. But the ones within the reserve period of 4 and 10 years can.

It's a bit of a stretch to call the looting and rioting an Insurrection. That X block area in Seattle comes close but no where else does it rate. And if the Mayor and Governor handles it, it's not an insurrection. But the President MUST give prior notice before sending in the Federal Troops. And the only time the Feds can be sent in is if the Governor either fails or the Governor requests them. Like the Governor of California did for the LA riots when those 4 cops were found innocent in the Rodney King Beating. And Yes, Congress had to approve it which took just about an hour. Posse Comitatus Act was observed. The other times was when the State Government was directly denying Citizens their 1st amendment rights.

The problem with sending in the 82nd, you will notice the wording Rump used. He used past tense. I have Sent, not I am willing to send. The President must announce that he's willing to send in the troops first. Those troops fell under the Posse Comitatus Act and could not be used. They did not meet the requirements of the Insurrection Act. Rump got burnt on that one trying to do whatever the hell he wanted. It was an illegal order and the Military was well within their rights to refuse to follow that order according to their own UCMJ.

Just for argument sake, it's say that the Washington Governor cannot handle the X blocks of walled in armed area or elects not to handle it. In that case, Rump can make the announcement that he is ready do send in Federal Troops to quell it. He has to announce it before he actually starts deploying the troops. This gives the State the time and leverage to handle the situation. Yes, you are right, sending the 82nd into that situation isn't going to be pretty. I spent a lot of time around the 82nd and they NEVER did anything pretty. Lots of broken, smashed and dead things but nothing pretty. They are, by far, the worst Peace Keeping Force that has ever been tried to be used in the history of mankind. But, damned, they can fight.

I can see you have the States Rights entwined with the Federals. The wording may look similar but they are completely different. The Governor has a lot more leeway than the President does.

OK, thanks for the explanation. I think we generally agree, and as you said, its complicated.
I don't know how long Trump will let that 6?-block area revolt before he announces he's sending troops to clear the streets, I'm hoping not long.
Agree it won't be a peace-keeping mission, antifa has ARs and body armor.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Here is something to think about. History versus current times
(LegalEagle’s Law Review)

If the rioting and looting continues, with people dying of the ANTIFA and BLM movement, there is a plan that can be enabled not only to have the insurrections use of the military, but the end of elections until such time all insurrections are ended.

Martial Law

Martial law on the national level may be declared by Congress or the president. Under Article I, Section 8, Clause 15, of the Constitution, Congress has the power "[t]o provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel Invasions." Article II, Section 2, Clause 1, of the Constitution declares that "[t]he President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States." Neither constitutional provision includes a direct reference to martial law.

So keep up the occupation of Seattle, resist the police, burn cities, and by Nov 3rd, all elections will be suspended, and President Trump stays in power. You can thank your spineless liberal politicians who really like the President by having your out there keeping up the violence....

Let's address the election first. If Rump were to delay the elections past Jan 20 at 12 Noon 2021, he would no longer be the President and Pence would no longer be the VP. They are both under a 4 year contract. Not a second past Jan 20, Noon, 2021. It would go to the next successor until the election could be done. Are you aware that the next series of Successors are all Democrats? And it wouldn't be Nancy either since She will be up for election as well. Hey, this might be a great idea. It would get rid of even Moscow Mitch as well. The Governors would have to appoint the Congress and guess what, the Dem Governors outnumber the Republican Governors. So it wouldn't turn out the way you think it would.

Denver had looting and rioting the first night. It caught everyone by surprise. Day two, the Colorado National Guard and the full brunt of the LEs were on the streets. The Organization that is driving the Looting and Rioting decided to hit an easier city. This was done by a Democratic Mayor and a Homosexual Democratic Governor. Just because a city is run by a given Political leaning Mayor doesn't mean that all Democrat Mayors and Governors are going to let it happen.

Rump had the power to mobilize the 82nd, he just didn't have the power to turn them into a Police Force. That was already tried in Iraq and they learned that the 82nd can't police anything other than cigarette butts. They are trained to break things and kill, not to keep the peace. Rump blew it big time. Luckily, someone in the chain of command had better sense.

You are wrong, if Martial Law is declared the president remains in office until the insurrection ends. So please keep burning cities and murdering innocent people...Long live President Trump....You do realize that it is within his power to call up the militia, which is about 200 million armed very pissed off citizens. Who do you think they are going to go after?

Where did you get that silly idea?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Here is something to think about. History versus current times
(LegalEagle’s Law Review)

If the rioting and looting continues, with people dying of the ANTIFA and BLM movement, there is a plan that can be enabled not only to have the insurrections use of the military, but the end of elections until such time all insurrections are ended.

Martial Law

Martial law on the national level may be declared by Congress or the president. Under Article I, Section 8, Clause 15, of the Constitution, Congress has the power "[t]o provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel Invasions." Article II, Section 2, Clause 1, of the Constitution declares that "[t]he President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States." Neither constitutional provision includes a direct reference to martial law.

So keep up the occupation of Seattle, resist the police, burn cities, and by Nov 3rd, all elections will be suspended, and President Trump stays in power. You can thank your spineless liberal politicians who really like the President by having your out there keeping up the violence....

Let's address the election first. If Rump were to delay the elections past Jan 20 at 12 Noon 2021, he would no longer be the President and Pence would no longer be the VP. They are both under a 4 year contract. Not a second past Jan 20, Noon, 2021. It would go to the next successor until the election could be done. Are you aware that the next series of Successors are all Democrats? And it wouldn't be Nancy either since She will be up for election as well. Hey, this might be a great idea. It would get rid of even Moscow Mitch as well. The Governors would have to appoint the Congress and guess what, the Dem Governors outnumber the Republican Governors. So it wouldn't turn out the way you think it would.

Denver had looting and rioting the first night. It caught everyone by surprise. Day two, the Colorado National Guard and the full brunt of the LEs were on the streets. The Organization that is driving the Looting and Rioting decided to hit an easier city. This was done by a Democratic Mayor and a Homosexual Democratic Governor. Just because a city is run by a given Political leaning Mayor doesn't mean that all Democrat Mayors and Governors are going to let it happen.

Rump had the power to mobilize the 82nd, he just didn't have the power to turn them into a Police Force. That was already tried in Iraq and they learned that the 82nd can't police anything other than cigarette butts. They are trained to break things and kill, not to keep the peace. Rump blew it big time. Luckily, someone in the chain of command had better sense.

You are wrong, if Martial Law is declared the president remains in office until the insurrection ends. So please keep burning cities and murdering innocent people...Long live President Trump....You do realize that it is within his power to call up the militia, which is about 200 million armed very pissed off citizens. Who do you think they are going to go after?

Here are three methods that might be used.

1. The States do not have to have an election for the Federal Positions at all. In the case of a delayed election past Jan 20, the Governors can select the Electoral College for each state. They will do that before Jan 6. On Jan 6, the EC will vote and be tallied and the winners of the President and the VP will be announced. The EC will be voting blind so it's a crap shoot.

2, The Governors decide not to use the EC at all. They wait until Jan 20 NOON and then each state selects the open positions in Congress and they fill it. At that point, the House selects the President and the Senate selects the VP. The problem the republicans have is, there are more Democrat Governors than Republican Governors and that pretty much means both the PRez and the VP will be Democrat.

3. If the election is delayed past Noon Jan 20, the Speaker of the House becomes President unless the Speaker also was up for reelection. Then it would pass to the next person in the chain. This time around, it would end up Senate ProTem who is a Democrat. I suggest you read something you seem to be ignoring.

Only the first option would make it mean that Rump could be reelected. Pretty much, the other 2 means that the best case for Republicans would be to keep the VP spot as long as they retained the Senate Majority.

It's the Constitution of the United States. To be specific, the 20th Amendment. I can see why the Congress is resolved on the 3rd day of Jan. If the Presidential and the VP is not resolved by Jan 20, then Congress will vote to appoint the next President. Just for argument sake, let's say that the election is postponed past Jan 3 so the Governors will select the replacements for the seats that are pending. And all seats that are up for election will be considered open. If the election is postponed past Jan 20 Noon, then the House selects the President and the Senate selects the President. It would be a strange mix of Biden and Pence.

Amendment XX
Section 1.
The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

Section 2.
The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

Sorry you Rumpsters, things don't go the way your fantasies dictate in the real world. In otherwords, I am sure that at least one advisor for Rump will tie Rump to a chair and hammer this into his head.

The President Pro Tem of the Senate is REPUBLICAN Chuck Grassley. I posted this earlier and you ignored it. BTW, the Electoral College meets in December.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Thank you for that very good legal explanation of the "posse comitatus act" and the "Insurrection Act".
Powell and the generals are wrong.
Trump is absolutely right to use the military to protect citizens from rioters.

The laws were written as if they were to be done by a sane person. Obviously, when they were written, the congress never met Rump. Plus, it's merkie at best in what a President can do without the permission of the Governor or in the case of DC, the Mayor with Federal Military Troops. Can you imagine if a President were to send Federal Troops to a state to have those troops to be met by State Organized Militia (State Defense) troops? There are a few of the states with the SDF that are NOT controlled nor can they be Federalized by the Federal Government. Sounds to me like more SDFs (State Defense Force) needs to created across the nation. This is the very reason that the 2nd amendment was created.

What you just said is plain wrong.
1. Trump does NOT need approval from governors or mayors to protect US citizens from rioters/insurrectionists.
2. Kennedy sent in troops to integrate schools over the objections of governors.
3. No state militia or police force would ever oppose US combat forces, that would be suicide, and they are not stupid.
4. All state forces, such as the national guard, can be commanded by the president instead of governors, i.e. they can be Federalized.
5. Your last sentence has to do with "militias". No militia would oppose US combat troops. Most of the militias are ex-military, whose sons are active duty. Sounds like you're an antifa wannabe??

Let's start out with Item 5. In Texas, every Fire Fighter, State Police and even Local Law Enforcement are automatically in the SDF. Only a small percentage have served in the Military.

Item 4: According to the 1916/17 National Guard Act, only those that are eligible can be recalled. For instance, I got recalled the first year of my Military Retirement to go count NBC Pallets. Not to do the work, but to supervise it. When Desert Storm ended, I went back home. I was eligible for recall for 10 years. After that time period, I could only be recalled for something like a World War until Age 65. For someone with less than 20 (not normal retirement) the recall is for 4 years. When the 4 year expires they are no longer eligible for recall to active duty. That means that only a very small number of the SDF can be recalled. The Governor also has the option to call up those Ex Military that are outside of the Federal Recall range. Meaning, the Feds will probably be outnumbered by quite a margin. And, outside of heavy tanks, many Police Forces have quite a few Armored vehicles.

Item 3: Care to reread the 2nd Amendment again? Chances are, it won't be just one state that the Feds will be facing. It will be considered a Tyranical Invasion that if the Feds do it in one state then they will do it to other states. Any President that forces that issue won't last the afternoon in office.

We'll take item 1 and 2 together. The ONLY time a President has resorted to this has been when the Governor has been severely tromping on citizens civil rights. The Governor has the ability to call up the National Guard, the SDF and the LE in full force if he thinks it's necessary to protect the Citizens rights. Some were a little slow to react but it's getting done without the need of Federal Troops. The conditions for the President to order Federal Troops into the cities to do the LE's job just fell under why the 2nd amendment was adopted in the first place.

1/2. I think we kind of agree, that a president can send the US Army in if a governor is not following US law, and citizens' rights are being violated. The Insurrection Act was amended to give the president wide discretion on the use of troops if/when needed. I can see where generals Powell, Kelly, Mattis, and others don't want to send the military in to "suppress insurrections", but IMHO it needs to be done since the mayor won't send in cops, and the governor won't send in their National Guard. The people and businesses in those cordoned off blocks are being deprived of their rights, Trump needs to restore Law & Order.

3. We disagree on the 2nd Amendment. Half the militias would be on one side and half on the other. If Trump sends troops into Seattle to remove the insurgents, I'm not seeing any militia members that would take up arms to oppose the US troops. The insurgents can have guns as per the 2nd Amendment, but my money's on the Army.

4. I'm not talking "recall" I'm talking who commands the state's National Guard forces. In Texas its a little complicated. Some groups are commanded by the governor, and some by the DOD; Texas Military Forces - Wikipedia
Texas Military Forces exist under civilian control. Since 1903, Texas Military Forces are authorized by Title 32 of the United States Code and Article 4 of the Texas Constitution to "execute the laws of the State, to suppress insurrections, and to repel invasions."[23][24] Texas Army National Guard and Texas Air National Guard units are also subject to Title 10 of the United States Code, which legally empowers the United States government to mobilize them when more resources are needed than available in the United States Armed Forces for war, national emergency, or national security.[25] Under Title 10, operations are conducted under command of the United States Department of Defense by the Secretary of Defense.

It's more complicated than that. You will notice that no State legally calls their own forces Guards even if that is what they are. Only the National Guard can use that term. So they created another term for the State only forces called State Defense Force. It's what the old State Guard was before the 1916/17 National Guard Act. The only way that the Feds can call the SDF up that are not subject to military conventional callup is to reinstate the draft. Otherwise, the ones that are outside the recall time period or have never served cannot be called up to the Federal Military. But the ones within the reserve period of 4 and 10 years can.

It's a bit of a stretch to call the looting and rioting an Insurrection. That X block area in Seattle comes close but no where else does it rate. And if the Mayor and Governor handles it, it's not an insurrection. But the President MUST give prior notice before sending in the Federal Troops. And the only time the Feds can be sent in is if the Governor either fails or the Governor requests them. Like the Governor of California did for the LA riots when those 4 cops were found innocent in the Rodney King Beating. And Yes, Congress had to approve it which took just about an hour. Posse Comitatus Act was observed. The other times was when the State Government was directly denying Citizens their 1st amendment rights.

The problem with sending in the 82nd, you will notice the wording Rump used. He used past tense. I have Sent, not I am willing to send. The President must announce that he's willing to send in the troops first. Those troops fell under the Posse Comitatus Act and could not be used. They did not meet the requirements of the Insurrection Act. Rump got burnt on that one trying to do whatever the hell he wanted. It was an illegal order and the Military was well within their rights to refuse to follow that order according to their own UCMJ.

Just for argument sake, it's say that the Washington Governor cannot handle the X blocks of walled in armed area or elects not to handle it. In that case, Rump can make the announcement that he is ready do send in Federal Troops to quell it. He has to announce it before he actually starts deploying the troops. This gives the State the time and leverage to handle the situation. Yes, you are right, sending the 82nd into that situation isn't going to be pretty. I spent a lot of time around the 82nd and they NEVER did anything pretty. Lots of broken, smashed and dead things but nothing pretty. They are, by far, the worst Peace Keeping Force that has ever been tried to be used in the history of mankind. But, damned, they can fight.

I can see you have the States Rights entwined with the Federals. The wording may look similar but they are completely different. The Governor has a lot more leeway than the President does.

OK, thanks for the explanation. I think we generally agree, and as you said, its complicated.
I don't know how long Trump will let that 6?-block area revolt before he announces he's sending troops to clear the streets, I'm hoping not long.
Agree it won't be a peace-keeping mission, antifa has ARs and body armor.

If the Washington Governor want reelected, he has the power to do it. He has elected not to do it. He has the full force of a well equipped National Guard using Federal equipment or he can do what the Governor and Mayor did in 1968 in California and request Federal Military Help during their Riots. It doesn't take a Federal President decree to get the job done. I don't think you are ready to see the 82nd raising any American City like it was a Middle Eastern City full of Insurgents. It's a very ugly thing when it happens there and should be unthinkable happening here. Give it time. Try and find other solutions and if they don't work, send in the tanks.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Thank you for that very good legal explanation of the "posse comitatus act" and the "Insurrection Act".
Powell and the generals are wrong.
Trump is absolutely right to use the military to protect citizens from rioters.

The laws were written as if they were to be done by a sane person. Obviously, when they were written, the congress never met Rump. Plus, it's merkie at best in what a President can do without the permission of the Governor or in the case of DC, the Mayor with Federal Military Troops. Can you imagine if a President were to send Federal Troops to a state to have those troops to be met by State Organized Militia (State Defense) troops? There are a few of the states with the SDF that are NOT controlled nor can they be Federalized by the Federal Government. Sounds to me like more SDFs (State Defense Force) needs to created across the nation. This is the very reason that the 2nd amendment was created.

What you just said is plain wrong.
1. Trump does NOT need approval from governors or mayors to protect US citizens from rioters/insurrectionists.
2. Kennedy sent in troops to integrate schools over the objections of governors.
3. No state militia or police force would ever oppose US combat forces, that would be suicide, and they are not stupid.
4. All state forces, such as the national guard, can be commanded by the president instead of governors, i.e. they can be Federalized.
5. Your last sentence has to do with "militias". No militia would oppose US combat troops. Most of the militias are ex-military, whose sons are active duty. Sounds like you're an antifa wannabe??

Let's start out with Item 5. In Texas, every Fire Fighter, State Police and even Local Law Enforcement are automatically in the SDF. Only a small percentage have served in the Military.

Item 4: According to the 1916/17 National Guard Act, only those that are eligible can be recalled. For instance, I got recalled the first year of my Military Retirement to go count NBC Pallets. Not to do the work, but to supervise it. When Desert Storm ended, I went back home. I was eligible for recall for 10 years. After that time period, I could only be recalled for something like a World War until Age 65. For someone with less than 20 (not normal retirement) the recall is for 4 years. When the 4 year expires they are no longer eligible for recall to active duty. That means that only a very small number of the SDF can be recalled. The Governor also has the option to call up those Ex Military that are outside of the Federal Recall range. Meaning, the Feds will probably be outnumbered by quite a margin. And, outside of heavy tanks, many Police Forces have quite a few Armored vehicles.

Item 3: Care to reread the 2nd Amendment again? Chances are, it won't be just one state that the Feds will be facing. It will be considered a Tyranical Invasion that if the Feds do it in one state then they will do it to other states. Any President that forces that issue won't last the afternoon in office.

We'll take item 1 and 2 together. The ONLY time a President has resorted to this has been when the Governor has been severely tromping on citizens civil rights. The Governor has the ability to call up the National Guard, the SDF and the LE in full force if he thinks it's necessary to protect the Citizens rights. Some were a little slow to react but it's getting done without the need of Federal Troops. The conditions for the President to order Federal Troops into the cities to do the LE's job just fell under why the 2nd amendment was adopted in the first place.

1/2. I think we kind of agree, that a president can send the US Army in if a governor is not following US law, and citizens' rights are being violated. The Insurrection Act was amended to give the president wide discretion on the use of troops if/when needed. I can see where generals Powell, Kelly, Mattis, and others don't want to send the military in to "suppress insurrections", but IMHO it needs to be done since the mayor won't send in cops, and the governor won't send in their National Guard. The people and businesses in those cordoned off blocks are being deprived of their rights, Trump needs to restore Law & Order.

3. We disagree on the 2nd Amendment. Half the militias would be on one side and half on the other. If Trump sends troops into Seattle to remove the insurgents, I'm not seeing any militia members that would take up arms to oppose the US troops. The insurgents can have guns as per the 2nd Amendment, but my money's on the Army.

4. I'm not talking "recall" I'm talking who commands the state's National Guard forces. In Texas its a little complicated. Some groups are commanded by the governor, and some by the DOD; Texas Military Forces - Wikipedia
Texas Military Forces exist under civilian control. Since 1903, Texas Military Forces are authorized by Title 32 of the United States Code and Article 4 of the Texas Constitution to "execute the laws of the State, to suppress insurrections, and to repel invasions."[23][24] Texas Army National Guard and Texas Air National Guard units are also subject to Title 10 of the United States Code, which legally empowers the United States government to mobilize them when more resources are needed than available in the United States Armed Forces for war, national emergency, or national security.[25] Under Title 10, operations are conducted under command of the United States Department of Defense by the Secretary of Defense.

It's more complicated than that. You will notice that no State legally calls their own forces Guards even if that is what they are. Only the National Guard can use that term. So they created another term for the State only forces called State Defense Force. It's what the old State Guard was before the 1916/17 National Guard Act. The only way that the Feds can call the SDF up that are not subject to military conventional callup is to reinstate the draft. Otherwise, the ones that are outside the recall time period or have never served cannot be called up to the Federal Military. But the ones within the reserve period of 4 and 10 years can.

It's a bit of a stretch to call the looting and rioting an Insurrection. That X block area in Seattle comes close but no where else does it rate. And if the Mayor and Governor handles it, it's not an insurrection. But the President MUST give prior notice before sending in the Federal Troops. And the only time the Feds can be sent in is if the Governor either fails or the Governor requests them. Like the Governor of California did for the LA riots when those 4 cops were found innocent in the Rodney King Beating. And Yes, Congress had to approve it which took just about an hour. Posse Comitatus Act was observed. The other times was when the State Government was directly denying Citizens their 1st amendment rights.

The problem with sending in the 82nd, you will notice the wording Rump used. He used past tense. I have Sent, not I am willing to send. The President must announce that he's willing to send in the troops first. Those troops fell under the Posse Comitatus Act and could not be used. They did not meet the requirements of the Insurrection Act. Rump got burnt on that one trying to do whatever the hell he wanted. It was an illegal order and the Military was well within their rights to refuse to follow that order according to their own UCMJ.

Just for argument sake, it's say that the Washington Governor cannot handle the X blocks of walled in armed area or elects not to handle it. In that case, Rump can make the announcement that he is ready do send in Federal Troops to quell it. He has to announce it before he actually starts deploying the troops. This gives the State the time and leverage to handle the situation. Yes, you are right, sending the 82nd into that situation isn't going to be pretty. I spent a lot of time around the 82nd and they NEVER did anything pretty. Lots of broken, smashed and dead things but nothing pretty. They are, by far, the worst Peace Keeping Force that has ever been tried to be used in the history of mankind. But, damned, they can fight.

I can see you have the States Rights entwined with the Federals. The wording may look similar but they are completely different. The Governor has a lot more leeway than the President does.

OK, thanks for the explanation. I think we generally agree, and as you said, its complicated.
I don't know how long Trump will let that 6?-block area revolt before he announces he's sending troops to clear the streets, I'm hoping not long.
Agree it won't be a peace-keeping mission, antifa has ARs and body armor.

If the Washington Governor want reelected, he has the power to do it. He has elected not to do it. He has the full force of a well equipped National Guard using Federal equipment or he can do what the Governor and Mayor did in 1968 in California and request Federal Military Help during their Riots. It doesn't take a Federal President decree to get the job done. I don't think you are ready to see the 82nd raising any American City like it was a Middle Eastern City full of Insurgents. It's a very ugly thing when it happens there and should be unthinkable happening here. Give it time. Try and find other solutions and if they don't work, send in the tanks.

Newsflash for you, moron! Those were NOT combat troops from the 82nd Airborne Division but military police units assigned to that division. My son's infantry unit was in the 2nd Infantry Division, but they assigned to the 4th Stryker Brigade and were an infantry regiment. My daughter's unit was a Stryker Cavalry unit and when they deployed only took part of the Regiment by squadron She was XO of the Readiness Support Squadron and used trucks and Humvees instead of Strykers.