Trump and martial law
But there was a loophole: the Posse Comitatus Act was waived if the president invokes the Insurrection Act. Almost 200 years earlier, Congress had passed the Insurrection Act to severely curtail the president’s ability to deploy the military within the U.S., a law that was further buttressed by the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. On September 30, 2006, Congress passed the Defense Authorization Act of 2006, a $500 billion, 591-page bill that included a few paragraphs razing a key constraint on presidential power. But that vaporous phrase helped stampede cowardly congressmen facing reelection a few months later.
An August 2006 White House press release decried “the equivalent of a weapon of mass effect being used on the city of New Orleans.” “Weapon of mass effect” sounded like the rhetorical equivalent of computer-generated images in a low-budget movie.
Many of the current Democratic leaders in the House and Senate were part of that surrender-without-a-fight civil liberties debacle.Īfter the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s disastrous response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005, the Bush administration pushed Congress to make it far easier for a president to declare martial law to avoid similar public relations debacles. Bush and any subsequent president to effectively declare martial law largely as a matter of bureaucratic convenience. In 2006, Congress voted almost unanimously to entitle President George W. Amazingly, Congress passed a law 14 years ago that made martial law practically a push-button perk of presidents. The current round of rioting would be much more constitutionally perilous if not for one intransigent U.S. A formal declaration of martial law, on the other hand, effectively suspends civil liberties and gives all authority to the military. troops would still be assisting in enforcing laws under state and local authority. Many frenzied activists presume that there is no difference between the Insurrection Act and martial law. Prior to sending in troops, Trump would be required to issue a proclamation to “immediately order the insurgents to disperse and retire peaceably to their abodes within a limited time,” according to the law. troops under the Insurrection Act if a governor requested aid. But any support could quickly vanish if deploying troops resulted in significant casualties of innocent civilians. military to supplement city police forces” by a 58 percent to 30 percent margin. On Saturday, Trump warned “the Federal Government will step in and do what has to be done, and that includes using the unlimited power of our Military and many arrests.” On Monday, Trump declared that if cities or states refuse sufficiently defend the life and property of their residents, “I will deploy the United States military and quickly solve the problem for them.”Įven the Washington Post concedes that Trump “ has the legal authority to deploy active-duty military personnel to states to help quell violent protests” though experts warn such a move “would probably generate strong pushback from some state and local officials.” According to a survey released Tuesday by Political Polls, Americans support “calling in the U.S. President Trump may be veering closer to declaring martial law in response to rioting in many cities across the nation.