Latest news with #PosseComitatusActof1878
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
National Guard troops are in LA—Here's what they can and can't do, for now, as Trump deploys them in response to protests
The California National Guard troops that President Donald Trump deployed to the Los Angeles area in response to protests can only provide protection and logistical support to immigration agents there, according to Georgetown University law professor Stephen Vladeck. But that changes, if the Insurrection Act is invoked. President Donald Trump's decision to federalize California National Guard troops and deploy them to the Los Angeles area puts them in more of a support role, according to a legal expert. On Saturday, Trump exercised his authority to place state National Guard troops under federal command in response to protests over Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids—over the objections of Gov. Gavin Newsom and local officials who said it's unnecessary. On Sunday morning, members of the 79th Infantry Brigade Combat Team, the largest combat unit in the California Army National Guard, began arriving in Los Angeles. But the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 largely prevents federal troops from engaging in civil law enforcement, Stephen Vladeck, a law professor at Georgetown University, wrote in his newsletter. 'All that these troops will be able to do is provide a form of force protection and other logistical support for ICE personnel,' he explained. 'Whether that, in turn, leads to further escalation is the bigger issue (and, indeed, may be the very purpose of their deployment).' There is an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act that would allow troops to take a more active role in law enforcement. The Insurrection Act, which has not been invoked yet, lets them 'to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.' In theory, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, the Insurrection Act should be used only in a crisis that civilian authorities can't handle, but 'the law's requirements are poorly explained and leave virtually everything up to the discretion of the president.' At face value, Trump's order to deploy California National Guard troops to Los Angeles is meant to protect Department of Homeland Security personnel from attacks, Vladeck explained. While that represents a significant and unnecessary escalation, he added, it's not by itself a mass deployment of troops into a U.S. city. 'That said, there are still at least three reasons to be deeply concerned about President Trump's (hasty) actions on Saturday night,' Vladeck warned. First, the presence of federal troops raises the risk of escalating violence. Second, there's the possibility that the deployment of National Guard troops, even in a limited manner now, sets up more aggressive responses to similar protests later, perhaps even the Insurrection Act. Third, domestic use of the military can have 'corrosive effects' on the troops, the relationship between federal and local/state authorities, as well as the relationship between the military and civil society. 'For now, the key takeaways are that there really isn't much that these federalized National Guard troops will be able to do—and that this might be the very reason why this is the step the President is taking tonight, rather than something even more aggressive,' Vladeck said. This story was originally featured on
Yahoo
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Opinion - Suddenly, immigration enforcement is job one for the entire federal government
President Trump has decided that the most important mission, across the federal government, is immigration enforcement — not investigating serious crimes of drugs or guns, terrorists or tax evaders, or preparing our military for missions overseas. His administration has shifted unprecedented federal resources to this mission — the biggest such reorganization since 9/11. But is it making America safer, or leaving us more vulnerable? Trump's executive orders use language evocative of the period after 9/11 and the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security. The orders refer to a migration emergency, invoke the language of war — 'invasion' and 'predatory incursion' — and designate as terrorist organizations the cartels that have been facilitating this migration. But even after 9/11, emergency warlike powers were not invoked against immigration to this extent. Several of Trump's executive actions have redirected the missions and resources of not only DHS but also the Department of Justice, the Department of Defense, and the Department of State to prioritize immigration enforcement. One is designed 'to ensure that the Armed Forces of the United States prioritize the protection of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the United States along our national borders.' Trump's orders declaring an 'invasion' of migrants are the basis for this redirection of military activity. The same order gives the military command with responsibility for the defense of North America the mission to 'seal the borders' and a mandate to create mission plans and guidance for the use of the Force to repel 'forms of invasion, including unlawful mass migration, narcotics trafficking, human smuggling and trafficking, and other criminal activities.' Note the recognition that these are 'criminal' activities, although they are described as an 'invasion.' A longstanding law, the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, prevents the military from engaging in civilian law enforcement inside the United States, with an exception under the Insurrection Act of 1807 — which the Trump administration has threatened to use. These changes have led to a significant redeployment of military and federal law enforcement resources toward immigration enforcement inside the United States. On the military side, these include using Department of Defense facilities to detain arrested migrants, employing Department of Defense aircraft to deport migrants, deploying Navy warships to the Gulf of Mexico to manage illegal immigration, and using Air Force reconnaissance planes to monitor the southern border. Another recent action reassigned a 60-foot strip of federal land along the border in New Mexico and Texas as a military zone, which allows the military to arrest migrants crossing there. Military resources have been used at the border in the past, but never to this extent in modern times. Arrests at the border have reached record lows, raising questions about this continuing use of military assets. Arrests inside the country are high, disruptive and fear-generating, even though deportations haven't reached Biden-era levels. The fiscal costs are also high, forcing the Department of Homeland Security to reconsider using military aircraft for deportations. Meanwhile, federal law enforcement resources across the government are also being redirected. The office of Homeland Security Investigations within U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement was specifically redirected back to immigration enforcement as its primary mission. This reversal leaves its work investigating human trafficking, counter-proliferation, drug smuggling and other missions as secondary. Another executive order directed the attorney general and the secretary of Homeland Security to supplement available personnel to secure the southern border and enforce immigration laws, essentially ordering law enforcement officers from the Drug Enforcement Administration; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives; FBI; and the U.S. Marshalls Service to serve as immigration agents. The Homeland Security secretary also requested that IRS criminal investigators assist with immigration enforcement and deputized the State Department's Diplomatic Security Service as immigration officers. And recent reports even have U.S. Postal Service Inspectors being used in immigration investigations. On the prosecutions side, the Department of Justice has been ordered to prioritize prosecution of all criminal penalties authorized under immigration law, including many offenses that have not been criminally prosecuted in decades, such as misdemeanor fines or imprisonment for failing to report a change of address. These actions raise questions about whether other crucial law enforcement functions are being de-emphasized: Are the Drug Enforcement Administration's drug cartel investigations, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives' illegal gun tracking, FBI's serious crimes and terrorism investigations, ICE's child trafficking investigations, and the Department of Justice prosecutions being affected? How long is this redeployment expected to last? Yes, the increase in immigration during the Biden administration created significant challenges at the border and in U.S. cities, with some entrants posing criminal or security threats. However, most immigrants do not fall into these categories. That makes the Trump administration's singular focus on immigration enforcement questionable. Despite the administration's claim it is going after 'the worst of the worst,' it also is deporting student protestors, families, and those fleeing persecution. And the actions of the vast majority of immigrants do not support the administration's claims that we are facing an 'invasion' or terrorist threat so existential as to call for several national emergency declarations. At least one federal judge has agreed. Of course, we should take all legitimate threats to our homeland and our borders seriously. But those are not limited to the realm of immigration. In zeroing in on immigration enforcement, the administration risks neglecting other serious threats to national security — to our peril. Theresa Cardinal Brown is a fellow at the National Immigration Forum, a Council on National Security and Immigration leader and a veteran of the Department of Homeland Security who served in the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
23-05-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Suddenly, immigration enforcement is job one for the entire federal government
President Trump has decided that the most important mission, across the federal government, is immigration enforcement — not investigating serious crimes of drugs or guns, terrorists or tax evaders, or preparing our military for missions overseas. His administration has shifted unprecedented federal resources to this mission — the biggest such reorganization since 9/11. But is it making America safer, or leaving us more vulnerable? Trump's executive orders use language evocative of the period after 9/11 and the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security. The orders refer to a migration emergency, invoke the language of war — 'invasion' and 'predatory incursion' — and designate as terrorist organizations the cartels that have been facilitating this migration. But even after 9/11, emergency warlike powers were not invoked against immigration to this extent. Several of Trump's executive actions have redirected the missions and resources of not only DHS but also the Department of Justice, the Department of Defense, and the Department of State to prioritize immigration enforcement. One is designed 'to ensure that the Armed Forces of the United States prioritize the protection of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the United States along our national borders.' Trump's orders declaring an 'invasion' of migrants are the basis for this redirection of military activity. The same order gives the military command with responsibility for the defense of North America the mission to 'seal the borders' and a mandate to create mission plans and guidance for the use of the Force to repel 'forms of invasion, including unlawful mass migration, narcotics trafficking, human smuggling and trafficking, and other criminal activities.' Note the recognition that these are 'criminal' activities, although they are described as an 'invasion.' A longstanding law, the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, prevents the military from engaging in civilian law enforcement inside the United States, with an exception under the Insurrection Act of 1807 — which the Trump administration has threatened to use. These changes have led to a significant redeployment of military and federal law enforcement resources toward immigration enforcement inside the United States. On the military side, these include using Department of Defense facilities to detain arrested migrants, employing Department of Defense aircraft to deport migrants, deploying Navy warships to the Gulf of Mexico to manage illegal immigration, and using Air Force reconnaissance planes to monitor the southern border. Another recent action reassigned a 60-foot strip of federal land along the border in New Mexico and Texas as a military zone, which allows the military to arrest migrants crossing there. Military resources have been used at the border in the past, but never to this extent in modern times. Arrests at the border have reached record lows, raising questions about this continuing use of military assets. Arrests inside the country are high, disruptive and fear-generating, even though deportations haven't reached Biden-era levels. The fiscal costs are also high, forcing the Department of Homeland Security to reconsider using military aircraft for deportations. Meanwhile, federal law enforcement resources across the government are also being redirected. The office of Homeland Security Investigations within U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement was specifically redirected back to immigration enforcement as its primary mission. This reversal leaves its work investigating human trafficking, counter-proliferation, drug smuggling and other missions as secondary. Another executive order directed the attorney general and the secretary of Homeland Security to supplement available personnel to secure the southern border and enforce immigration laws, essentially ordering law enforcement officers from the Drug Enforcement Administration; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives; FBI; and the U.S. Marshalls Service to serve as immigration agents. The Homeland Security secretary also requested that IRS criminal investigators assist with immigration enforcement and deputized the State Department's Diplomatic Security Service as immigration officers. And recent reports even have U.S. Postal Service Inspectors being used in immigration investigations. On the prosecutions side, the Department of Justice has been ordered to prioritize prosecution of all criminal penalties authorized under immigration law, including many offenses that have not been criminally prosecuted in decades, such as misdemeanor fines or imprisonment for failing to report a change of address. These actions raise questions about whether other crucial law enforcement functions are being de-emphasized: Are the Drug Enforcement Administration's drug cartel investigations, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives' illegal gun tracking, FBI's serious crimes and terrorism investigations, ICE's child trafficking investigations, and the Department of Justice prosecutions being affected? How long is this redeployment expected to last? Yes, the increase in immigration during the Biden administration created significant challenges at the border and in U.S. cities, with some entrants posing criminal or security threats. However, most immigrants do not fall into these categories. That makes the Trump administration's singular focus on immigration enforcement questionable. Despite the administration's claim it is going after 'the worst of the worst,' it also is deporting student protestors, families, and those fleeing persecution. And the actions of the vast majority of immigrants do not support the administration's claims that we are facing an 'invasion' or terrorist threat so existential as to call for several national emergency declarations. At least one federal judge has agreed. Of course, we should take all legitimate threats to our homeland and our borders seriously. But those are not limited to the realm of immigration. In zeroing in on immigration enforcement, the administration risks neglecting other serious threats to national security — to our peril. Theresa Cardinal Brown is a fellow at the National Immigration Forum, a Council on National Security and Immigration leader and a veteran of the Department of Homeland Security who served in the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations.
San Francisco Chronicle
08-05-2025
- Politics
- San Francisco Chronicle
Plan to use Travis base as immigrant detention center criticized by California Dems
Two Bay Area Democratic House members blasted U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth for plans to use Travis Air Force Base in Fairfield as an immigrant detention center, calling it 'a dangerous militarization of immigration enforcement' that will 'unnecessarily degrade military readiness,' according to a letter to Hegseth obtained by The Chronicle. Homeland Security and Defense Department officials discussed efforts to evaluate military installations for potential immigration detention and removal operations in early April, including at the Solano County base, KQED first reported last week. Trump has pledged to deport one million immigrants this year. Through March, the Pentagon has spent $376 million this year on border operations involving immigration. The Trump administration plans to detain immigrants at military bases around the country, including Fort Bliss near El Paso, Texas, Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll told reporters in March. Federal officials have been looking for months for detention facilities in northern California and other Western states that could house between 850 to 950 detention beds. Activists and union organizers are concerned that ICE is also considering opening a detention center in a shuttered federal prison in Dublin. Reps. John Garamendi, D-Fairfield, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, and Mike Thompson, D-Napa, told Hegseth in a May 5 letter that they were 'deeply frustrated' and 'gravely concerned' about using Travis as a migrant detention center. 'Utilizing a military installation for civilian law enforcement and detention operations raises significant concerns about the misuse of military resources, operational readiness, and national security. The decision to use Travis AFB as a migrant detention center would both constitute a dangerous militarization of immigration enforcement and unnecessarily degrade military readiness,' the Democrats wrote. The Democrats say the use of a military facility for domestic law enforcement violates the federal Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which forbids active duty military personnel from participating in civilian law enforcement except when expressly authorized by law, according to the Brennan Center for Justice. They want the Pentagon to explain how building a detention center would affect Travis' water and energy infrastructure and its future operations. The Democrats also want Hegseth to explain how many migrants would be detained there, how the Department would ensure that military personnel would not be performing law enforcement activities and to reveal how much in already appropriated federal funding is being diverted to build and maintain the detention facility. The Department of Defense declined to comment on the letter to The Chronicle. 'As with all Congressional correspondence, the Department will respond directly to the author,' the Pentagon responded Wednesday in an email. This isn't the first time that Garamendi has expressed concerns to the Pentagon about using Travis for deportation-related issues. In January, The Chronicle f irst reported
Yahoo
11-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Pentagon faces deadline on recommending whether to invoke the Insurrection Act
Happy Friday! We are getting close to the 90-day deadline that President Donald Trump set back in January for the secretaries of the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security to recommend whether the president should invoke the Insurrection Act to address what he described as an 'invasion' of gangs, human traffickers, and criminals at the southern border. More than 10,000 service members are currently deployed to the U.S.-Mexico border. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 prevents federal troops from enforcing civilian laws within the United States. As such, U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agents accompany troops on patrols to conduct any law enforcement activities. But the Insurrection Act suspends Posse Comitatus when the country faces a rebellion, political violence, or other major incidents, said Risa Brooks, a political science professor at Marquette University in Wisconsin. 'If the Insurrection Act were invoked by a president, and the secretary of defense ordered it, the military would likely be able to apprehend migrants or clear the streets of protesters,' Brooks said. President George H.W. Bush last invoked the law in 1992 in response to riots in Los Angeles following the acquittal of police officers accused of beating motorist Rodney King. It's worth noting that invoking the Insurrection Act is not the same as declaring martial law. 'The difference from martial law is that the elected civilians remain in charge and civil law remains — the military are enforcing existing civil law, not making the laws,' said Kori Schake, head of the defense policy team at the American Enterprise Institute think tank in Washington, D.C. 'They are legally empowered to behave as police, including to use lethal force to suppress insurrections, riots, and enforce the law.' As always, there's plenty more news. Here's your weekly rundown. Army secretary now leading the ATF. Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll has been named acting head of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, or ATF, a Justice Department agency in charge of enforcing federal gun laws and conducting other law enforcement missions. Driscoll replaced Kash Patel, who is currently the director of the FBI. During Trump's first term, Patel served as chief of staff for Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller. It is unclear why Driscoll was named head of the ATF or how exactly he will divide his responsibilities with the Defense and Justice Departments. Marine Corps sticks with 13-Marine rifle squads. After years of tinkering with the size of rifle squads, the Marine Corps has settled on 13-Marine formations. One Marine in each squad will be an expert in 'precision fires,' such as loitering munitions and drones. 'This extends the range and increases the lethality of our Marine infantry squads and platoons,' said Lt. Col. Eric Flanagan, a spokesman for Combat Development & Integration. Army cutting parachutist positions. In a major restructuring of its airborne units, the Army plans to recode nearly 20,000 parachutist positions so that soldiers in those billets will no longer have to maintain their jump status, Army Times first reported. The move would represent a reduction of roughly 35% of all Army parachutist positions. Soldiers in the re-coded billets would no longer receive jump pay. 'Fix the damn rust.' Navy Secretary John Phelan has reiterated that he has a mandate from the president to get surface vessels in ship shape. Phelan said Trump has told him several times to 'fix the damn rust,' echoing his testimony during his Feb. 27 confirmation hearing. For years, pictures shared on social media have shown U.S. Navy ships covered with rust, such as one photo of the destroyer USS Dewey in February when it arrived in Singapore. Air Force eliminates 'family days.' The Department of the Air Force is no longer allowing airmen and Space Force Guardians to take extra days off during the 11 annual federal holidays, often referred to as 'family days.' Acting Air Force Secretary Gary A. Ashworth wrote in an April 7 memo that granting extra time off around the holidays 'does not support our ability to execute the mission with excellence while maintaining our competitive advantage.' Why some ailing veterans aren't covered by the PACT Act. Advocates are warning Congress that a law that has expanded healthcare for veterans exposed to toxins does not go far enough. The Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act, known as the PACT Act, has some notable coverage gaps for troops and their families who live at bases where they are exposed to toxic substances, one veterans advocate said during a recent roundtable on Capitol Hill. Veterans and spouses who are not covered by the PACT Act talked about how they've suffered from cancer and other illnesses due to radiation, fuel spills, and chemical contaminations on stateside U.S. military bases. That's all a lot to process for one week. Stay tuned for more developments. Jeff Schogol
