• DominusOfMegadeus
    link
    fedilink
    163
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    The President deploying Marines inside the U.S. without invoking the Insurrection Act, declaring an emergency, or getting local/state approval — especially just to respond to peaceful protests — is unlawful on multiple levels:

    • Violates DoD Directive 3025.18 – Active-duty military (including Marines) can’t engage in domestic law enforcement unless explicitly authorized.
    • Violates the First Amendment – Peaceful protest is protected. Military suppression = unconstitutional. (NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886).
    • Violates the Fourth Amendment – Military detentions/searches are illegal without cause. (Indianapolis v. Edmond, 531 U.S. 32).
    • Ignores Posse Comitatus limits – PCA (18 U.S.C. § 1385) applies to Army/Air Force, but DoD extends it to all branches.
    • Unlawful military orders – Troops must disobey unconstitutional orders (UCMJ Art. 92; U.S. v. Calley, 48 C.M.R. 19).
    • Impeachable abuse of power – Violates Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution.

    This isn’t just controversial — it’s flat-out illegal.

    EDIT: Formatting EDIT: Better Citations: (DoDI 3025.21, Enclosure 3, Section 3)

    https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/302521p.pdf

    1. EXCEPTIONS BASED ON MILITARY SERVICE. By policy, Posse Comitatus Act restrictions (as well as other restrictions in this Instruction) are applicable to the Department of the Navy (including the Marine Corps) with such exceptions as the Secretary of Defense may authorize in advance on a case-by-case basis.
    LISTED EXCEPTIONS

    a. Such exceptions shall include requests from the AG for assistance pursuant to section 873(b) of Reference (al). b. Requests for approval of other exceptions should be made by a senior official of the civilian law enforcement agency concerned, who verifies that: (1) The size or scope of the suspected criminal activity poses a serious threat to the interests of the United States and enforcement of a law within the jurisdiction of the civilian agency would be seriously impaired if the assistance were not provided because civilian assets are not available to perform the mission; or (2) Civilian law enforcement assets are not available to perform the mission, and temporary assistance is required on an emergency basis to prevent loss of life or wanton destruction of property. 4. MILITARY READINESS. Assistance may not be provided if such assistance could adversely affect military preparedness. Implementing documents issued by the Heads of the DoD Components shall ensure that approval for the disposition of equipment is vested in officials who can assess the effect of such disposition on military preparedness. 5. APPROVAL AUTHORITY. Requests by civilian law enforcement officials for use of DoD personnel to provide assistance to civilian law enforcement agencies shall be forwarded to the appropriate approval authority. a. The Secretary of Defense is the approval authority for requests for direct assistance in support of civilian law enforcement agencies, including those responding with assets with the potential for lethality, except for the use of emergency authority as provided in subparagraph 1.b.(3) of this enclosure and in Reference ©, and except as otherwise provided below. b. Requests that involve Defense Intelligence and Counterintelligence entities are subject to approval by the Secretary of Defense and the guidance in DoDD 5240.01(Reference (ar)) and Reference (j). 24 Change 1, 02/08/2019 ENCLOSURE 3 DoDI 3025.21, February 27, 2013 c. The Secretaries of the Military Departments and the Directors of the Defense Agencies may, in coordination with the ASD(HD&GS), approve the use of DoD personnel: (1) To provide training or expert advice in accordance with paragraphs 1.e. and 1.f. of this enclosure. (2) For equipment maintenance in accordance with paragraph 1.d. of this enclosure. (3) To monitor and communicate the movement of air and sea traffic in accordance with subparagraphs 1.d.(5)(b) 1 and 4 of this enclosure. d. All other requests, including those in which subordinate authorities recommend disapproval, shall be submitted promptly to the ASD(HD&GS) for consideration by the Secretary of Defense, as appropriate. e. The views of the CJCS shall be obtained on all requests that are considered by the Secretary of Defense or the ASD(HD&GS), that otherwise involve personnel assigned to a unified or specified command, or that may affect military preparedness. f. All requests that are to be considered by the Secretary of Defense or the ASD(HD&GS) that may involve the use of Reserve Component personnel or equipment shall be coordinated with the ASD(M&RA). All requests that are to be considered by the Secretary of Defense or the ASD(HD&GS) that may involve the use of NG personnel also shall be coordinated with the Chief, NGB. All requests that are to be considered by the Secretary of Defense or the ASD(HD&GS) that may involve the use of NG equipment also shall be coordinated with the Secretary of the Military Department concerned and the Chief, NGB.

    • Ms. ArmoredThirteen
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1324 days ago

      Only illegal if someone enforces the law, and I have a sneaking suspicion the chances of that are low

      • DominusOfMegadeus
        link
        fedilink
        204 days ago

        You’re not wrong, but it’s important to call it out. And to CONSTANTLY call out the message to our troops that it is incumbent upon them to refuse to follow illegal orders.

        • @D_C@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          39
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          I said that about the stolen top secret documents because of all the obvious treason and the even more obvious° sending/selling of said documents. Yet the american public decided it was a good idea to vote him in once again so he could pardon himself.

          Nothing will happen to him. I see no one over there with the backbone to do anything to bring him to justice. The best you can hope for is death or debilitating stroke.
          The bad news is even if that happens today then Fatboy Tangerine has shown just how easy it is to be a dictator. The next guy will be more organised.

          (°Why obvious? There was a fax machine right there. A fax machine in a toilet. The fact that there was old tech like a fax machine shows what it was being used for, but to move one to a fucking toilet full of the documents is plain damning. Anyone who believes differently is either an idiot, or corrupt. Or both.
          End of, full stop, no further explanation is needed.)

        • @freeman@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          94 days ago

          Thats what I thought about the mocking of the disabled man, the “grab em by the pussy” comment, the Epstein-thing, the impeachement, Jan6, the classified documents, Musks salute, …

          If you have the majority of the voting public, parties, media and judges behind yourself then you are pretty safe doing illegal things, even in a Democracy.

      • @rumba@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        74 days ago

        Smells like AI, but that doesn’t mean it’s just slop. You can look up each of the cited laws—they’re not long or particularly difficult reads. They are all arguably accurate citations.

        1. Iffy “explicitly authorized” is a loaded phrase for this use case. He controls enough DoD leadership to make it happen legally without much resistance.

        2. Legit.

        3. It depends on the framing. If rocks were being thrown at ICE, the argument likely wouldn’t hold up.

        4. Likely legit.

        5. Legit, but remember that this simply means the military can be held accountable for their actions. If they assault or kill someone, they can face legal consequences. It’s just precedence. Essentially, this is the point in law where you can’t say you were just following orders.

        6. Legit.

        However, within this framework, prosecution depends on willingness—someone has to actively push for it, and the government has to be stable enough to recognize these violations as valid. For the most part, these are pardonable offenses.

        TL;DR: Until there’s a regime change, none of this will carry much weight.

          • @callouscomic@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 days ago

            At my work I have some serious privacy and security questions about what people are pasting into chatgpt.

          • DominusOfMegadeus
            link
            fedilink
            54 days ago

            No, the information is correct from what I can determine. But it would have taken me a lot longer to find the relevant sections of law and precedent and sift through them on my own.

            • @rumba@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              24 days ago

              They’re all mercifully short reads (at least enough to get the idea if they apply) and famous enough to be easy to find. I just went through them in a higher-level post. They’re all right-ish. 3 are solid, the other 3 are technically accurate, but there’s enough wiggle room to get out of it.

        • @CoffeeJunkie@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          Definitely needs fact checking, but yeah I do the same thing when I have some good points to be made on a popular topic that is being discussed in various threads. Not everyone needs a super special unique response when copy-paste is a thing. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

          I don’t think I’m a bot or AI…🤖