Posse Comitatus: The Past returns to haunt the United States

The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which limits the use of United States Troops, domestically, has been a thorn in the side of President George W. Bush’s second term. First, on the Mexican border where troops are needed for border security the President can’t send them. Now, during Hurricane Katrina his hands are similarly tied.

The Posse Comitatus Act has never benefited the United States but the concept should have been considered by many foreign governments. In the early 1990’s, for example, federal troops were used against peaceful protestors in Communist Yugoslavia. Similar events occurred in the former Soviet Union when Soviet troops were used to quash civil unrest. The crowning example of a nation that needed such a separation of federal and state police powers, however, was China on the day that its national troops rolled into Tiananmen Square. Furthermore, examples of the misuse of the national military in Latin and Central America could fill several volumes of texts.

Why, then, should we reconsider the Posse Comitatus Act, an act which prevents powerful federal forces from being used to usurp state and local law enforcement? After all, the citizenry of so many other nation’s citizens could have benefitted from such a law. In the United States, the reasons are both elementary and practical: In this country, unlike many nations, our military is under civilian control. This “separation” of the command structure of our military goes a long way from protecting us from the misuse of our soilders in domestic affairs. Futher, the original intent of the Act was not to protect the American people but to prevent blacks from voting after the Civil War. It, in effect, thwarted the executive branch from preventing abuse by the States when it came to enforcing the rights of the newly emancipated slaves.

To give an historical perspective, the reason domestic use of federal troops had become a concern after Reconstruction was because, while the Southern States were allowed back into the Union, they were determined to stop black men from participating in the electorial process. The concept was advanced that federal troops be used to enforce the newly enacted legislation. The intent of the Abolishionists were thwarted, however, when in 1878 Posse Comitatus was passed to be used as the mechanism by the States to prevent the Federal Government from using the military to monitor Southern elections. The reality is that Posse Comitatus was engineered by to suppress the voting rights of black Americans, not to protect the people from potential abuses by the military. In reality, Posse Comitatus not only harmed potential black voters after Reconstruction but, in modern times, has left the President’s hands tied during times of national emergency.

Recently, the two situations that have highlighted the obvious harm of this obstruction of our Commander in Chief are the porous nature of our National borders and the recent disaster in New Orleans. When Hurricane Katrina hit, our federal troops were paralyzed by the bureaucratic bungling of an incompetent Governor who failed to trigger the mechanism that would have allowed the military to swiftly fulfill their mandates: restoring civil order and saving human lives.

President Bush is, legislatively, powerless to dispatch federal troops unless the affected State directly requests intervention: This arcane procedural morass, especially during a time when our nation is at war with enemies both at home and abroad, has become a deadly albatross around the neck of our nation’s security. The only solution is to repeal Posse Comitatus and allow our Commander in Chief to have a relatively unfetterd hand to use federal troops to protect all of us from incompetent and, often, malfeasant State action.

Letters to the editor of The Houston Home Journal may be e-mailed to: rgambill@evansnewspapers.com (Please Include Your Name and Location)

William John Hagan can be contacted directly by e-mail at:William_Hagan@excite.com

William John Hagan can be visited on the internet at: http://williamjohnhagan.blogspot.com

The Act should be repealed and the President should be able to deploy the military wherever its assistance is needed - whether that's in relief assistance operations or protecting our borders. What do we have an army for if its hands are tied behind its back when it could be used to protect our country from threats both to life and the existence of the nation itself?

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

The act should NOT be repealed. Guarding the international border of the United States is well withing the perview of the military. The body politic simply lacks the will to do it.

Considering its unsavoury origins as a tool to allow the South to terrorize blacks - the Act lacks even a moral justification. The Posse Comitatus Act simply precludes the federal government from guaranteeing republican government in the States and for that reason alone can be considered equally unconstitutional as well.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

Why?

Because meals-on-wheels is not the function of the military, even within our own borders.

Because Mexican troops have already crossed and opened fire multiple times giving W all the authority he needs if he had the will.

I see your point but can you imagine what a clinton administration would do with such power. Any power you give to Bush is eventually going to fall into the hands of a democrat president.

The only solution is to repeal Posse Comitatus and allow our Commander in Chief to have a relatively unfetterd hand to use federal troops to protect all of us from incompetent and, often, malfeasant State action.

What happens if - in the future - the Commander in Chief is the one who is incompetent and malfeasant?

Strong State and local government is important in the concept of us being able to govern ourselves.

Being legally able to govern yourself is certainly important, but when you're standing in 20 feet of water and every house in town is destroyed, you will have a hard time exercising that right.

The Posse Comitatus Act has never benefited the United States …then, should we reconsider the Posse Comitatus Act, an act which prevents powerful federal forces from being used to usurp state and local law enforcement? After all, the citizenry of so many other nation’s citizens could have benefitted from such a law.

Whenever this question raises its ugly head it always brings to my mind the THE SAD TALE OF THE BONUS MARCHERS. http://www.worldwar1.com/dbc/bonusm.htm

The The Posse Comitatus Act has not always been respected. Some will likely say that because Washington D. C. is a Federal Reserve that the Act is not enforceable there. To that I would say that the principle still applies that Federal troops should not be used to enforce civil order.

Bonus Army ^

In fact, for more than a decade after 1878, black men did vote, even in the deep South. This is proved by the fact that black men were sometimes elected to office. It was in the 1890s that African-Americans were disenfranchised by means which, although entirely dishonest, were formally legal.

Consider that we wouldn't even be debating the repeal of Posse Commitatus if the Dead-@ss governor of Louisiana had just done her job and requested federal assistance. She was frozen like a deer in the headlights.

The author considers the requirement for a state governor to request federal aid to be 'arcane'? Gimme a break! The Constitution & Bill of Rights are full of procedural rules that could be charactarized as arcane depending on which side of the argument you are on.

In this country, unlike many nations, our military is under civilian control. This “separation” of the command structure of our military goes a long way from protecting us from the misuse of our soilders in domestic affairs.

Yes, the President gives the orders. But he is advised by, among others, the joint chiefs. Without Posse Commitatus a future President could be faced with a decision to use federal troops because he's simply being advised to use them. The article mentions China's use of troops in Tienanmen Square. I suppose some senior Chinese generals advised that course of action before the orders were cut. General Staffs plan, that's what they do. They tend to give advice based upon that planning.

There's another thing to remember: there is an exception to Posse Commitatus that covers certain types of technical troops. Chemical/Radiological Decontamination units are one such exception. If we want to make a broader exception for other logistical units, that might make sense.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.