Posted on 11/24/2018 10:21:33 PM PST by caww
There should be very little legal controversy in the military's employment to defend the border against an unlawful incursion by foreign nationals. The defense of territory and persons is the primary responsibility of the Department of Defense.
Other authorities also relevant specifically, the provisions under federal law as vested under Title 10, Chapter 13 of the U.S. code:
That whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.
Chapter 13 also includes another authority:
The President, by using the militia or the armed forces, or both, or by any other means, shall take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if it — (1) so hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States within the State, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection ...
Put simply, the Trump administration has the legal authority both to order troops to the border and to afford them with the authority to use force in the service of their duties.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
He not only has authority, he has the duty !
And the courts have nothing to do with this.
https://youtu.be/hpCqsN5zbwk
Posse Comitatus does NOT apply to non-citizens.
And bayonets.
However, there is disagreement over whether this language may apply to troops used in an advisory, support, disaster response, or other homeland defense role, as opposed to domestic law enforcement.
Posse Comitatus is “always looming in the background”....
Posse Comitatus has its genesis in the administration of Rutherford Hayes.
It was adopted and promoted by a Democrat Congress to prevent Federal Troops from enforcing the new amendments regarding B l ack citizenship or hunting down those lunatics in the KKK in southern states.
Democrats - making long term trouble again.
It is NOWHERE in the Constitution or our founding documents.
What the act was intended to do, was to prevent the military from acting as a police force, especially a private one for the likes of a power mad general or president. It never was to completely stop the military from operating within the borders of the United States.
Also military branches were granted congressional exemptions from posse comitatus beginning in the 1980s in order to help fight the “war on drugs.”.... Both the Navy and Air Force are allowed to provide equipment and personnel in a preemptive way to stop smuggling prior to drugs or drug runners breaching the nation’s borders.
No, I’m pretty sure our military is just for protecting other country’s borders /heavy oxy use.
We need the military in D.C.,too. Especially the marines.
We can put these on the border and track anyone that crosses to the car that picks them up or safe house they reach.
He absolutely has the authority in that area and getting rid of cross dressers too. All he has to do is say military readiness demands changes. 2 years in, he has not stepped up to really use his military authority, likely because Lap Dog Mattis keeps him in the dark on what he can really do.
Just heard that the other side is saying that Russia is coming to support the intruders:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lddwnf5m_34
I have no idea who these people are ... you and I know the odds are ZIP NADA ... NOT GONNA HAPPEN.
Sadly, he is probably the only American president ion recent times to understand and be willing ti enforce our borders.
Oddly a mine field on the border would be the most humane answer. Many hundreds die each year trying to cross our borders in the desert of our Southwest in the summers. They die due to heat prostration and lack of water. Only insane fools walk across a minefield, and as such the loss of life would be far less than dying in the desert due to lack of water and heat.
Which is more humane?
Oddly a mine field on the border would be the most humane answer. Many hundreds die each year trying to cross our borders in the desert of our Southwest in the summers. They die due to heat prostration and lack of water. Only insane fools walk across a minefield, and as such the loss of life would be far less than those dying in the desert due to lack of water and and the blistering heat of the desert.
Which is more humane?
And bayonets.
The good ol’ days are gone .. we use GAU-7s now,
Spy Drone Can See What You are Wearing From 17,500 Feet
If the President can’t use the military to defend OUR borders then we should just disband the military.
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.