Posted on 06/25/2022 8:39:39 PM PDT by TigerClaws
federal law?
Oh Pentagram, please cite the statute or code which addresses murdering babies.
so true and to the point
Judgment is on the way
You are absolutely incorrect.
Remember, I was a Military Policeman for a (short) period of time. While I never had to do it myself, I heard of my fellow soldiers need to pick up some bonehead that violated a state law (mostly DUI) and believe me, not only did they take it in the cheeks over the infraction at the military level, they would have had to answer to the state judicial system.
Now, oftentimes the state authorities and the military authorities would work it out that the military would do all the punishing, but if the state wanted it, and they never did, they could imprison a soldier.... resulting in a less-than-honorable discharge (or worse) for desertion.
Out of curiousity, and based on my experience, I looked up the way the law works when a soldier violates a state law. This is what I found:
Concurrent jurisdiction in times of peace
It is a cardinal principle of American jurisprudence that the government of the United States and that of the several states are, within their respectives spheres of action, separate and distinct sovereigns. Each may provide for the punishment of offenses against its laws. Neither can, by merely providing for the punishment of offenders against its laws, deprive others of the right to punish offenders against their laws. Where a soldier violates the military law of the United States and that of a state as well, the offender is punishable both as a citizen subject to the laws of the state wherein the offense wherein the offense was committed and also as a soldier subject to military law.15
The footnote (15), herein referenced, states:
15 One of the interesting cases to the point is State v. Rankin, 4 Cold. (Tenn.) 145 (1867). And as Judge Gilbert commented in Neall v. United States, 118 Fed. 699 (1902): "Forcible reasons may be suggested why courts-martial should be given exclusive jurisdiction of all offenses which are punishable under the articles of war, but we are not convinced that either in the constitution or in the acts of congress the intention has been expressed to except from the jurisdiction of the civil courts offenses committed by any persons or class of persons.
This is all settled law, now, decades after these rulings. However, in practice, the State will forego pursuing prosecution or punishment, knowing full well that the military will prosecute better and punish more severely. This State hand-over, of course, would not happen in exceptional cases, such as the hypothetical example that a soldier was found to be a serial killer.
Consider yourself educated. You're welcome. :^)
Again, I suspect you are wrong. I don't have the time to research this one, conclude I am 100% right, and present my proof, but if (for example) Germany had a strict "No Nuclear Weapons on our Soil" law, I believe we would be bound to observe that law.
Off-base DUI offenses If you are arrested for a DUI while you are off-base as a military service member, you will likely be charged in civilian court and not the military court. However, your commanding officer might initiate administrative penalties against you, including the following:
Require you to undergo alcohol treatment
Require you to undergo corrective training
Revoke your pass privileges
You might also have DUI charges filed against you by the military after your civilian DUI case is over.
Certainly, such a charge and successful prosecution is likely career-ending.
yep.
Looks like it.
I too was 95B and 95D for 11 years. You missed the point I am fully aware of if a soldier or Marine goes off post and commits a crime about dual jurisdiction. The same doesn’t apply for civilian LEO coming on post. They have zero jurisdiction over the military post only the Provost Marshall has jurisdiction of a civilian LEO wishes to enter the post to access a civilian they are looking to apprehend they must get Provost permission first and always are escorted by MPs inhale done this duty dozens of times. Civilian LEO cannot enter a post to get a active military personnel without the Provost approval and only if the crime the military member is accused of occurred off post. Any violation of the UCMJ which I still have a copy of on my desk is solely handled by the MPs MPI and CID. Civilian law outside of post have zero bearing on a soldier on post. The example I used was Alabama’s age of consent which was much lower than the UCMJ it doesn’t matter one hoot what’s Alabama’s law is the soldier is not subject to it nor protected by it on Federal soil that is the point. If the DOD decided to put abortion services on a military base the states law have zero effect on that.
I was stationed in Germany same rules applied German laws had zero jurisdiction in US soil which every military base is exactly that US soil, same for our embassies. The nuclear weapons you cite was negotiated via a treaty with Germany and NATO as all foreign policy is. A US soldier is no more bound on a US base to German law than Italian law or Iranian law it’s all irrelevant on that sovereign soil. A great example we when we were in Saudi Arabia and women could drive on base where it was US soil but could not in Saudi soil.
Don’t confuse cooperation with local law enforcement agencies with them having jurisdiction over DOD facilities, personal ,or operations of any kind they absolutely do not.
I find it interesting we both wore the brassard!!!
Ok, I’m glad you were aware of dual jurisdiction, and as a 95B, of course you would be.
I’m in agreement with the balance of your post. In fact, it’s not only military real estate that is not accessable by civilian LEOs. While working at the CDC, I heard of a civilian LEO that had to get permission to pick up someone in violation of Georgia law. Of course, they got it.
I guess I concede your point. Abortuaries on base would indeed be immune from state law. Give me a break, though, I’m not JAG. I drew my conclusion from my experience.
I’d wonder if civilians could partake of such a ‘service’, I would suspect not.
Another good example and one we took advantage of all the time is in Texas you must stop selling alcohol at 9pm Monday through Saturday and never on Sunday. Liquor that is. Fort Hood has no less than three class six stores two of them are 24/7 you can buy liquor 24/7 at those class six stores even though state TABC law makes it absolutely illegal to do that one foot off post. We routinely would leave the country dance hall at 2 am when the bars close go directly to the class six and buy half a dozen bottles of.hooch then take out haul to our off post living in private units and party with the girls till dawn. There was ZERO the Texas TABC could do about those class six selling booze all night local law enforcement could also do exactly jack crap since once the booze was in our possession there is no crime in possession it’s only the sale in Texas that is illegal after 9pm. The provost put in a policy that no soldier could leave post after 9pm with liquor purchased without a Texas TABC tax stamp but we were the MPs enforcing that so it is what it is. The point again is that Texas law had zero jurisdiction inside the fence of Fort Hood it is only Federal USC code and the UCMJ Fort Hood is sovereign US Federal soil not part of Texas at all from a local law enforcement or state level.
Yup, seen that alcohol ‘law override’ as well. Should have thought of that.
I think I was more referencing the multiple jurisdiction issue, I think I assumed you were a civvy with no knowledge of same, and I was demonstrating that (more narrow) point.
I’m old skool I went through the MP school at Anniston before it moved to Fort lost in the woods where I would later do SRT ar. I hate that place worse than Fort Hood.
Civilians would be subject to their state laws while off post and USC code on post the question would be could a state claim supremacy over civilians on Federal soil and subject them to state laws even out of state California does for taxes so does New York if a person claims California residence or New York. So there is precedence to hold a civilian to a state law even “out of state” my initial point was for military members on Federal soil.
What he is saying is that medical facilities on military bases will continue to do abortions, without regard to what laws the state they’re in passes.
Which is exactly the right thing to assert. Military bases are US Federal land they are not part of the state they are in from a legal or administrative sense. The states have zero say in what the DOD does on their sovereign territory. They also have no jurisdiction on DOD personal, military members or anyone who resides on that soil. The debate would be could civilians from the state leave their state for sovereign US Federal soil and not be still subject to their states laws. There is precedence both ways. California does it for taxes. Most states also do it for pedophiles who take minors out of the state or country and commit a state level crime. Allowing civilians into a DOD facility would take a Federal order from the executive branch to even begin with.
BTW did you know they changed our old MOS? Let me go look up what it is now....
.... it’s 31B.
Yes and that’s illegal.
See response 43.
The DoD is violating the law if they do this and the Secretary should be removed for undermining faith and confidence in SCOTUS.
This is an act of insurrection and disrespect to our Republic and we should have Congressional hearings on it. If action was taken to violate the laws of any state, those doing so should face state prosecution for their crimes.
I know it went 31B/D some years ago. I date myself all the time with the 95 reference and also Ft. McClellan it’s an industrial park now sad so sad.
Thank you.
We look as bad as the left when we twist the truth to push hyperbole.
That’s true and we realize that the DoD has gone leftist and is run by limp-wristed jerks.
But there’s no reason for us to stoop to their level and twist the truth until it’s not the truth and then push it.
The Democrats do enough evil without our having to distort things and make more evil.
Huh? Do you understand that the DOD is above the states due to the Federal supremacy clause for one and the fact that the DOD operates on sovereign US Federal soil that the respective states have no jurisdiction on. A US military base is 100% Federal soil same inside the USA as in every foreign country. Guantanamo Bay Cuba is not part of Cuba it is US dirt as American as the mall in D.C. Same for the U.S. Embassy in Moscow that’s also as American as apple pie. Fort Hood Texas is no more a part of Texas than Nuevo Laredo Mexico is. As someone with more than a decade of experience dealing with civilian and military law enforcement agencies and the interaction with the two I can assure you that Texas law enforcement has no say on military bases the Texas DPS has finals permission like every one else to set one foot on a base Texas for example normally that is granted without delay. Texas law flat out doesn’t apply to people on base who are military members, dependents,DOD contractors who live on that post and foreigners who at where at the behest of a joint military or DOD need. Civilians who enter and leave the base are subject to USC code while on post and will be escorted off in custody if they commit a crime to be held in civilian jails until the US marshals take custody for federal arraignment and transfer into the Federal system. If the local LEO refused to hold a civilian the Provost could hold them in military custody until the US marshals take custody.
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.