Venezuelan Gang in Tennessee

[Orange_Crush]

Because regular law enforcement (which btw can still include ICE,etc, not just local street cops) are the people actually charged with handling such matters. IF we really find ourselves in a scenario where it's bad enough to justify more than that so be it.

From what I can tell, the National Guard is as well.

 

[hog88]

From what I can tell, the National Guard is as well.

No, the NG is not charged with handling law enforcement matters.

 

[LouderVol]

The census is required by the constitution, that is correct but how congressional seats are allocated is not beyond every state gets at least one. So they could pass a law requiring a legal/citizen question on the census and allocate seats using the number of citizens in each state.

but don't/haven't.

so the current way seats are assigned is correct per the Constitution and the laws at hand.

 

[hog88]

but don't/haven't.

so the current way seats are assigned is correct per the Constitution and the laws at hand.

Yes that is correct but could be changed with simple legislation. It wouldn't take a constitutional amendment.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Congress cannot activate the NG.

If the President activates them Posse Comitatus comes into play so they couldn't be used as a police force.

Maybe I misread. So, only the President can activate for federal emergency, but Congress can define the federal emergency?

Duties and administrative organization​

National Guard units can be mobilized for federal active duty to supplement regular armed forces during times of war or national emergency declared by Congress,[33] the President[33] or the Secretary of Defense.[34] They can also be activated for service in their respective states upon declaration of a state of emergency by the governor of the state or territory where they serve, or in the case of Washington, D.C., by the Commanding General. Unlike U.S. Army Reserve members, National Guard members cannot be mobilized individually, except through voluntary transfers and Temporary Duty Assignments (TDY). The types of activation are as follows:

 

[hndog609]

From what I can tell, the National Guard is as well.

If it truly came to needing the NG I'm ok with them being used. I genuinely believe that without resorting to soldiers we have people in place that, if they aren't being held back by politics, can get after them sufficiently.

 

[hog88]

Maybe I misread. So, only the President can activate for federal emergency, but Congress can define the federal emergency?

That's the way I understand it.

 

[Orange_Crush]

If it truly came to needing the NG I'm ok with them being used. I genuinely believe that without resorting to soldiers we have people in place that, if they aren't being held back by politics, can get after them sufficiently.

The playbook so far, whether intended or not:

1. Defund and demonize the police until they are weakened and bordering on feckless.
2. Create/allow an emergency.
3. Bemoan anyone but the police fighting the emergency.

 

[Orange_Crush]

No, the NG is not charged with handling law enforcement matters.

Unless there is insurrection, or threat to citizen civil rights that a state can't/won't remedy:

What are the main statutory exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act?​

There are many statutory exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act, but the most important one is the Insurrection Act. Under this law, in response to a state government’s request, the president may deploy the military to suppress an insurrection in that state. In addition, the Insurrection Act allows the president — with or without the state government’s consent — to use the military to enforce federal law or suppress a rebellion against federal authority in a state, or to protect a group of people’s civil rights when the state government is unable or unwilling to do so.

The Posse Comitatus Act Explained

The law generally prevents the president from using the military as a domestic police force.

www.brennancenter.org

Illegal aliens instituting blatant gang activity and murdering people, with state gov't either refusing to deport or unable to stop... Would that fall under the interpretation of that caveat?

ETA: I wonder what the letter of the law is per: "to enforce federal law" when the state government is "unwilling to do so". Blue states refusing to enforce federal immigration/deportation law seems to fit the simple reading of he above (which I admit likely isn't the official verbage), and support the NG as the mode to "go through you" when state gov't refuses to abide/enforce immigration law/deportation.

 

[hndog609]

The playbook so far, whether intended or not:

1. Defund and demonize the police until they are weakened and bordering on feckless.
2. Create/allow an emergency.
3. Bemoan anyone but the police fighting the emergency.

Agreed, which is why the "if they aren't being held back by politics" was in my post.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Agreed, which is why the "if they aren't being held back by politics" was in my post.

Seems to fit the description of states UNWILLING to protect citizens' civil rights.

 

[hog88]

Unless there is insurrection, or threat to citizen civil rights that a state can't/won't remedy:


Illegal aliens instituting blatant gang activity and murdering people, with state gov't either refusing to deport or unable to stop... Would that fall under the interpretation of that caveat?

Man you don't want to open that box. Who gets to decide what an insurrection is? Remember all the people claiming Jan 6th was an insurrection?

 

[Orange_Crush]

Man you don't want to open that box. Who gets to decide what an insurrection is? Remember all the people claiming Jan 6th was an insurrection?

Apparently, from what I can tell, having not read the legislation itself, it sounds like it's not just insurrection. It's any time the state gov'ts refuse to uphold or enforce federal law.

Unless there is insurrection, or threat to citizen civil rights that a state can't/won't remedy:


Illegal aliens instituting blatant gang activity and murdering people, with state gov't either refusing to deport or unable to stop... Would that fall under the interpretation of that caveat?

ETA: I wonder what the letter of the law is per: "to enforce federal law" when the state government is "unwilling to do so". Blue states refusing to enforce federal immigration/deportation law seems to fit the simple reading of he above (which I admit likely isn't the official verbage), and support the NG as the mode to "go through you" when state gov't refuses to abide/enforce immigration law/deportation.

In addition, the Insurrection Act allows the president — with or without the state government’s consent — to use the military to enforce federal law or suppress a rebellion against federal authority in a state, or to protect a group of people’s civil rights when the state government is unable or unwilling to do so.

Unless the above is misrepresenting the legislation, the plain reading, the two ORs create three distinct exceptions given in the Posse Comitatus. Sounds like if the state gov't/police can't or won't:

1. Enforce federal law
2. Suppress rebellion against the federal gov't
3. Protect citizens' civil rights...

The President has the power to use them in police actions.

That box has been opened already. They've been used in such cases in relatively recent history, and the Republic didn't fall. (That's not being a smart-***. I merely mean that they've been used for such activities during desegregation, etc.)

 

[hog88]

Again, you don't want that box opened because once it is it will be abused.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Again, you don't want that box opened because once it is it will be abused.

It's been opened already. Eisenhower and Kennedy instituted it during the 50s and 60s in support of civil rights movement. With due respect, you're acting like it's a pandora's box that's never been opened.

 

[hog88]

It's been opened already. Eisenhower and Kennedy instituted it during the 50s and 60s in support of civil rights movement. With due respect, you're acting like it's a pandora's box that's never been opened.

Both abused the power and should have been impeached for it, the biggest difference today than in the 50's-60's is the people in charge. Would you want a person like Harris deciding what is/isn't an insurrection and deploying the NG because of recent precedent?

 

[Orange_Crush]

Both abused the power and should have been impeached for it, the biggest difference today than in the 50's-60's is the people in charge. Would you want a person like Harris deciding what is/isn't an insurrection and deploying the NG because of recent precedent?

It appears that they already could. So, you're arguing to NOT let Trump do it, despite it being an arrow in the quiver.

Like I said, I haven't pored through the verbiage of the law, but from what I read it does sound like the exact instances that the exceptions were written for: State governments that refuse to enforce federal law.

I'm not saying to call up the National Guard as an assassination squad for immigrant gangs. I'm saying that using the National Guard to deport illegal aliens in states where the state government refuses to do so seems to be a legal usage. (For that matter, until I see something different, it sounds like arresting the gangs would fall under that legal exception as well if the states can't/won't deal with them.)

Again with respect, the slippery slope argument isn't often beneficial, especially when the slope has already been skied.

 

[hog88]

It appears that they already could. So, you're arguing to NOT let Trump do it, despite it being an arrow in the quiver.

Like I said, I haven't pored through the verbiage of the law, but from what I read it does sound like the exact instances that the exceptions were written for: State governments that refuse to enforce federal law.

I'm not saying to call up the National Guard as an assassination squad for immigrant gangs. I'm saying that using the National Guard to deport illegal aliens in states where the state government refuses to do so seems to be a legal usage. (For that matter, until I see something different, it sounds like arresting the gangs would fall under that legal exception as well if the states can't/won't deal with them.)

I'm absolutely arguing for Trump NOT to use the military/NG to go after this gang. I don't want to give the federal government anymore power, authority or precedent to usurp state autonomy. What if the next POTUS and congress passes a law mandating kids be taught how to transition sexes and TN refuses? The state would be refusing to enforce federal law so they would be justified in sending in the military?

 

[Orange_Crush]

I'm absolutely arguing for Trump NOT to use the military/NG to go after this gang. I don't want to give the federal government anymore power, authority or precedent to usurp state autonomy. What if the next POTUS and congress passes a law mandating kids be taught how to transition sexes and TN refuses? The state would be refusing to enforce federal law so they would be justified in sending in the military?

So, you think that Trump NOT doing it now would prevent them from doing it THEN?

I'm not sure I can agree with your logic, that a legal right by the president shouldn't be used in a legitimate way, to prevent the possibility of a future president using it in an illegitimate time.

Trump using it now in that way is not giving the federal gov't more power. It's using the power it already has.

And again... I don't want him callng them up to kill gang members. I could agree with him calling them up to enforce deportation of illegal aliens, which would aid in the gang problem.

 

[volfanhill]

Again, you don't want that box opened because once it is it will be abused.

Send the national guard to every state that's allowed marijuana!

 

[LouderVol]

So, you think that Trump NOT doing it now would prevent them from doing it THEN?

I'm not sure I can agree with your logic, that a legal right by the president shouldn't be used in a legitimate way, to prevent the possibility of a future president using it in an illegitimate time.

Trump using it now in that way is not giving the federal gov't more power. It's using the power it already has.

And again... I don't want him callng them up to kill gang members. I could agree with him calling them up to enforce deportation of illegal aliens, which would aid in the gang problem.

Joe Biden pardoning Hunter was a power he already had. still an abuse of power. just because one CAN do something doesn't mean one SHOULD do that something.

there are other, better, less questionable options out there. I really don't know why people think its a good idea in the first place. its not going to be effective. its not going to be safe, for either the NG or average citizens. Its going to be far more expensive. Its not their job and many who signed up for NG duty aren't going to be invested in doing a job they disagree with. so even if you got them to do it, it would be easy for them to overlook things, or just generally not do a good job because its not their job. too many citizens or legal migrants are going to be caught up in it, far more than if the actual authorities were doing it. and when things get bad, its only going to get worse with the NG being involved vs a jurisdictional authority.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Joe Biden pardoning Hunter was a power he already had. still an abuse of power. just because one CAN do something doesn't mean one SHOULD do that something.

there are other, better, less questionable options out there. I really don't know why people think its a good idea in the first place. its not going to be effective. its not going to be safe, for either the NG or average citizens. Its going to be far more expensive. Its not their job and many who signed up for NG duty aren't going to be invested in doing a job they disagree with. so even if you got them to do it, it would be easy for them to overlook things, or just generally not do a good job because its not their job. too many citizens or legal migrants are going to be caught up in it, far more than if the actual authorities were doing it. and when things get bad, its only going to get worse with the NG being involved vs a jurisdictional authority.

So, you believe that legally using the national guard to round up and deport illegal aliens in states that won't do it is an abuse of the power of the Presidency?

I'm not sure I agree. Especially when the comparison is a President that used the Presidential pardon to pardon an accused co-conspirator in a scheme to sell his office for money, and pardoning him during the Congressional hearing into the matter? I don't think I can agree with the comparison.

Further, just because Biden abused it, the logic would be that Trump couldn't use a pardon for legitimate purposed just b/c Biden is an ass-hat? Again, I'm not sure I agree with the logic.

 

[hog88]

So, you believe that legally using the national guard to round up and deport illegal aliens in states that won't do it is an abuse of the power of the Presidency?

I'm not sure I agree.

Use federal law enforcement

 

[Orange_Crush]

Use federal law enforcement

OK. I'm down with that. I'm just saying that use of the NG is a legal option if needed, and the logic that legitimate, legal uses are bad b/c of the potential for illegitimate uses is not a slippery slope argument I can agree with.

Use Federal law enforcement. I distrust the DoJ, so if trump for some reason needed to bypass a politicized federal law enforcement, I could see myself agreeing with the use of the NG to round up and deport illegals.

 

[LouderVol]

So, you believe that legally using the national guard to round up and deport illegal aliens in states that won't do it is an abuse of the power of the Presidency?

I'm not sure I agree. Especially when the comparison is a President that used the Presidential pardon to pardon an accused co-conspirator in a scheme to sell his office for money, and pardoning him during the Congressional hearing into the matter? I don't think I can agree with the comparison.

Further, just because Biden abused it, the logic would be that Trump couldn't use a pardon for legitimate purposed just b/c Biden is an ass-hat? Again, I'm not sure I agree with the logic.

as hog has pointed out, and I pointed out. there are other, better options. going to the NG to do it would be an overstep. There are plenty of federal agents FAR better prepared for that role. use them first.

I also have a very different version of what an emergency is. to me an emergency is a fire with people still in the building. not a few more people walking the street than there "should" be.

now lets say those federal agents go in to clean up places, the local gangs band together and turn into an actual gang war, I would feel much different about the NG getting called in for that specific situation. but across the country as the first tool used is way too much.