tyb
What is the Insurrection Act and why is it trending online?
by: Nexstar Media Wire
Posted: Jan 11, 2021 / 12:42 PM CST / Updated: Jan 11, 2021 / 12:42 PM CST
(NEXSTAR) – The Insurrection Act is trending on Twitter and Google search following last week’s riot at the U.S. Capitol. The act allows the president to deploy federal troops or the federalized National Guard on U.S. soil in specific instances.
While President Donald Trump threatened to use it this summer against Black Lives Matter protests in Washington, D.C., the act was last invoked in 1992 to quell the Los Angeles riots.
The act was amended in 2006 to expand the instances in which the president may invoke the law beyond insurrection after the federal government’s response to Hurricane Katrina a year earlier was criticized, according to NPR. The change authorizes “the President to employ the armed forces during a natural disaster or terrorist attack.”
The Insurrection Act has not been floated as a way to stop protesters during the 2021 presidential inauguration.
District of Columbia Mayor Muriel Bowser is, however, seeking increased security around President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration in the wake of the mob insurrection at the Capitol.
“We believe strongly that the 59th Presidential Inauguration on January 20 will require a very different approach than previous inaugurations given the chaos, injury, and death experienced at the United States Capitol during the insurrection,” Bowser wrote in a letter to Chad Wolf, the acting secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
Pres. Trump faces ‘incitement of insurrection’ impeachment charge
She asked for a “pre-disaster declaration” for the District to allow for federal assistance.
Bowser cited “new threats from insurgent acts of domestic terrorists” and asked that the security period around the inauguration be extended from Monday through Jan. 24 and that the Capitol be included in the perimeter. She is urging that any applications for demonstrations be denied during that period.
Trump orders US flags lowered to honor officers
Washington, D.C., does not have jurisdiction over the Capitol and other federal property within its borders.
The original text of the Insurrection Act of 1807 says:
An Act authorizing the employment of the land and naval forces of the United States, in cases of insurrections
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That in all cases of insurrection, or obstruction to the laws, either of the United States, or of any individual state or territory, where it is lawful for the President of the United States to call forth the militia for the purpose of suppressing such insurrection, or of causing the laws to be duly executed, it shall be lawful for him to employ, for the same purposes, such part of the land or naval force of the United States, as shall be judged necessary, having first observed all the pre-requisites of the law in that respect.
APPROVED, March 3, 1807.
In her letter to Wolf, Bowser asked for coordination with the Defense and Justice departments, Congress and the Supreme Court to develop a security plan for all federal properties. “Consistent with established protocols and practices, it is the primary responsibility of the federal government to secure federal property in these situations,” she wrote.
Doing so, she said, will enable the Metropolitan Police Department “to focus on its local mission.”
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
https://kfor.com/news/what-is-the-insurrection-act-and-why-is-it-trending-online/
The Posse Comitatus Act and Related Matters:
The Use of the Military to Execute Civilian Law
Updated November 6, 2018
Summary
The Constitution permits Congress to authorize the use of the militia “to execute the Laws of the
Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.” And it guarantees the states protection against
invasion or usurpation of their “republican form of government,” and, upon the request of the
state legislature, against “domestic violence.” These constitutional provisions are reflected in the
Insurrection Acts, which have been invoked numerous times both before and after passage of the
Posse Comitatus Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 1385, in 1878. Congress has also enacted a number of
statutes that authorize the use of land and naval forces to execute their objective.
The Posse Comitatus Act outlaws the willful use of any part of the Army or Air Force to execute
the law unless expressly authorized by the Constitution or an act of Congress. History supplies
the grist for an argument that the Constitution prohibits military involvement in civilian affairs
subject to only limited alterations by Congress or the President, but the courts do not appear to
have ever accepted the argument unless violation of more explicit constitutional command could
also be shown. The express statutory exceptions include the legislation that allows the President
to use military force to suppress insurrection or to enforce federal authority, 10 U.S.C. Sections
251-255, and laws that permit the Department of Defense to provide federal, state and local
police with information, equipment, and personnel, 10 U.S.C. §§ 271-284.
Case law indicates that “execution of the law” in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act occurs (a)
when the Armed Forces perform tasks assigned to an organ of civil government, or (b) when the
Armed Forces perform tasks assigned to them solely for purposes of civilian government.
Questions concerning the act’s application arise most often in the context of assistance to civilian
police. At least in this context, the courts have held that, absent a recognized exception, the Posse
Comitatus Act is violated when (1) civilian law enforcement officials make “direct active use” of
military investigators; or (2) the use of the military “pervades the activities” of the civilian
officials; or (3) the military is used so as to subject “citizens to the exercise of military power
which was regulatory, prescriptive, or compulsory in nature.” The act is not violated when the
Armed Forces conduct activities for a military purpose.
The language of the act mentions only the Army and the Air Force, but it is applicable to the
Navy and Marines by virtue of administrative action and commands of other laws. The law
enforcement functions of the Coast Guard have been expressly authorized by act of Congress and
consequently cannot be said to be contrary to the act. The act has been applied to the National
Guard when it is in federal service, to civilian employees of the Armed Forces, and to off-duty
military personnel. The act probably only applies within the geographical confines of the United
States, but supplemental provisions of 10 U.S.C. §§ 271-284 appear to apply worldwide.
Finally, the act is a criminal statute under which there has been but a handful of known
prosecutions. Although violations will on rare occasions result in the exclusion of evidence, the
dismissal of criminal charges, or a civil cause of action, as a practical matter compliance is
ordinarily the result of military self-restraint.
This report provides an historical analysis of the use of the Armed Forces to execute domestic law
and of the Posse Comitatus Act, including their apparent theoretical and constitutional
underpinnings. The report then outlines the current application of the act as well as its statutory
exceptions, and reviews the consequences of its violation. This report appears in abridged form as
CRS Report R42669, The Posse Comitatus Act and Related Matters: A Sketch.
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R42659
PAGES 34+:
The Insurrection Acts
The clearest statutory exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act are found in the Insurrection Acts,
described above, in which Congress has delegated authority to the President to call forth the
military during an insurrection or civil disturbance. The modern version has changed little from
the original enactments,230 and is now found in Chapter 13 of Title 10, U.S. Code.231 The three
main authorities differ according to which constitutional provision they are meant to implement,
but the provisions have often been used together or without specifying which part of Chapter 13
of Title 10, U.S. Code, provided the authority.232 In any case where the President considers it
necessary to invoke the authority to use the militia or Armed Forces under these provisions, he is
required by 10 U.S.C. Section 254 to issue a proclamation immediately ordering “insurgents to
disperse and retire peaceably to their abodes within a limited time.”
The following sections describe the modern authorities and how they have been invoked since the
passage of the Posse Comitatus Act, including some instances where a separate authority may
have been used for similar purposes.
At the Request of a State
Section 251 of Title 10 (previously section 331 of Title 10) authorizes the President to use the
military to suppress an insurrection at the request of a state legislature, or its governor, in the
event the legislature cannot be convened.233 It is meant to fulfill the federal government’s
responsibility to protect states in the event of “domestic violence”
234 (although the term “insurrection” is arguably much narrower than the phrase “domestic violence” in the
Constitution). The first request by a governor for troops after enactment of the Posse Comitatus
Act appears to have occurred in 1879, when the governor of Nebraska requested a company of
troops to help protect a local court where the trial of a prominent outlaw was taking place, which
had occasioned concern that the courthouse would be the scene of a rescue attempt by the portion
of the band of outlaws still at large.235 This request was denied, however, as it was framed as a
request to use the troops as a posse comitatus, which, according to the Secretary of War, had
become unlawful following enactment of the Posse Comitatus Act,236 although if the situation
were to become more dire, the governor could request aid from the President in the form of troops
under military command.237
Another proclamation was issued under this provision in 1892 due to a miners’ strike in Coeur
d’Alene, ID.238 In 1899, President McKinley deployed 500 troops to Coeur D’Alene, ID, at the
governor’s request, to keep a conflict between union miners and mine owners under control, but
did not issue a proclamation required by statute.239 Although by this time General Hancock’s
doctrine regarding the relationship between federal and state troops had gained acceptance,240
state officials directed operations there.241 When the governor of Colorado requested federal aid
to assist state militia to cope with a coal miners’ strike, Secretary of War Elihu Root informed the
governor that any troops furnished pursuant to the relevant provision of the insurrection statutes
would not be at the disposal of the governor, but would remain under the direction of the
President.242
During the early part of the 20th century, Presidents generally insisted that governors comply with
the requirements of the Insurrection Act and the Constitution in formulating requests for the
assistance of the Army.243 After the governor of Nevada requested troops in 1907 to put down
violence by a miners’ union that was forcibly removing non-union workers from the area, nine
companies of infantry were sent there, but told not to act until a proclamation was issued.244
The mere presence of troops having quieted the unruly element, no proclamation was issued.245
President Roosevelt chastised the governor for having requested federal troops without
endeavoring to convene the legislature as required under the Constitution and Insurrection Act.246
In 1914, a miner’s strike at Ludlow, Colorado, led the governor there to request federal troops,
which President Wilson granted.247
In 1917, after virtually the entire National Guard was called into federal service for the war in
Europe,248 the Secretary of War instituted a “Direct Access Policy” to permit local and state
officials to make direct requests for the assistance of federal troops to reduce the burden on
states.249 Between 1919 and 1920, federal troops were employed to assist in putting down labor
disputes and other minor disturbances 29 times, all without the issuance of a presidential
proclamation.250 Troops were deployed from the lumber mills of the Northwest to the copper
mines in Arizona and New Mexico, and from the coal mines in Appalachia to the oil fields in
Texas and Louisiana, justified on the need to keep up production for the war and replace absent
state militia.251 Federal troops also intervened to keep the peace in several cities afflicted by racial
quarrels.252 The policy was revoked in 1921 due to the perception that troops were being
misused,253 and President Harding issued the requisite proclamation in order to send troops to
quell a dispute involving West Virginia coal miners.254 The governor directed state police forces
to act under the direction of the U.S. military commander.255
At the request of the Commissioners of the District of Columbia, President Hoover used federal
troops in 1932 to oust the Bonus Marchers from federal property in Washington, DC, but did not
issue a proclamation.256 President Roosevelt turned down several requests during the 1930s to
provide federal troops for strike duty,257 but directed the Secretary of War in 1941 to seize and
operate an aviation plant where a strike threatened wartime fighter plane production.258 Although
the Attorney General likened the situation to an insurrection, the President’s order did not make
reference to the insurrection statutes,259 nor was it accompanied by a proclamation to disperse.
When faced with losing their deferred status under the draft, the workers promptly returned to the
plant and resumed production under military supervision.260 Other labor disturbances were
similarly addressed by having the Army or Navy seize and manage plants or railroads deemed
necessary for the war effort, but these occurred under separate authorities.261
That is why it will never happen just like a direct military invasion will never occur.
Any New World Order Council of Evil Overlord's in their right mind would just use two or three nukes detonated at approx. 250-300 miles above the U.S. and blame it on some "rogue" nation that they secretly control or perhaps the Sun.
Congressional Report: A North Korean EMP Attack Would Kill “90% of all Americans”
"It is critical, therefore, that the U.S. national leadership address the EMP threat as a critical and existential issue."
KYREE LEARY OCTOBER 16TH 2017
https://futurism.com/congressional-report-a-north-korean-emp-attack-would-kill-90-of-all-americans
After Mysterious Closure, Solar Observatory In New Mexico Reopens
September 17, 20183:44 PM ET
https://www.npr.org/2018/09/17/648804508/after-mysterious-closure-solar-observatory-in-new-mexico-reopens#:~:text=On%20Sept.,post%20office%20was%20also%20closed.
10 Bishops but who is keeping count?!
czechs out, Anon
I thence patherns!
Trump martial law: Can Donald Trump declare martial law?
DONALD TRUMP has four days until the end of his first term, following months of resistance from Republican supporters and discussions of "martial law". Can Donald Trump declare martial law?
By LIAM DOYLE
PUBLISHED: 07:20, Sun, Jan 17, 2021 | UPDATED: 07:44, Sun, Jan 17, 2021
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1384974/Trump-martial-law-Donald-Trump-President-Insurrection-Act-evg
Internet Explodes as Trump Meets With ‘My Pillow Guy’ Whose Notes Reportedly Mention ‘Insurrection Act’ and ‘Martial Law’
Published on January 15, 2021 at 06:24 PM ET By David Badash
https://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/2021/01/internet-explodes-as-trump-meets-with-my-pillow-guy-whose-notes-reportedly-mention-insurrection-act-and-martial-law/
A look at what didn't happen this week
Trump didn't invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807
CLAIM: It has been officially confirmed the Insurrection Act has been secretly signed by President Donald Trump.
THE FACTS: The president didn't invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807 in an effort to stay in office. To do so he would have to make a public declaration giving clear reasons for the move, which allows a president to call on the military to address a domestic crisis.
January 17, 2021 at 2:04 a.m.
https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2021/jan/17/a-look-at-what-didnt-happen-this-week/
Guess I can't wear that shirt anywhere for a little while… BTW your cute little collage has been officially commandeered.