[dcwusmc]

Your remark is true as far as it goes, it is not a Constitutional question. However, I have to agree with cynicom re: Jail Tom Ridge. He and the rest of the crop of professional politicians do nothing with the Constitution except wipe their a$$es with it.

[DugwayDuke]

"However, I have to agree with cynicom re: Jail Tom Ridge."

Oh, cynicom may well be right, I was only pointing out that he was in hot pursuit for the wrong reason.

" In that case, it is far easier to ask forgiveness than permission and your zeal to live up to your oath is commendible.... in the finest traditions of the service."

Those are kind words and thank you for taking the time to express them. However, I must admit some lack of knowledge on my part. I haven't really studied Posse Comitatus. I merely reacted thinking that no law would stand that would require the military not to do it's duty to defend the American people.

I've taken a small amount of time to study this act more and I've found it's so shot full of holes with exceptions as to be almost pointless. There are even a few documents available on the web that argue that it almost needs re-enactment.

But, having said that, even a cursory examination of this act reveals that it does not prohibit the exercise by the military or the president any constitutionally granted powers. Posse Comitatus does not prohibit the military from taking action to defend the United States or it's citizens. Meaning that in the scenario I described, any officer who claimed that he could not act because of this act would be derelict of his oath and duties. A moments reflection should confirm this. How can an Act of Congress nulify a power granted by the Constitution? It cannot, therefore the military would be free to act in that scenario.