TYBs
PB >>21768634 @Holden_Culotta: Ron Paul warns that the US military was just “authorized to kill Americans on US soil … I think it’s very, very dangerous.” PB
>DoD Directive is 5240.01
Directive: https://dodsioo.defense.gov/Portals/46/Documents/DoDD_5240.01_DoD_Intel_Intel-Related_Assist_to_LE_and_Civil_Authorities_27_Sep_24.pdf?ver=5mL1ROn5buFBpQmcUsG3ig%3D%3D
The Differences Between the 2016 and 2024 Versions
-
Focus of the 2016 Version
The 2016 version of the directive did not mention the use of lethal force. Instead, it focused on:
Civil liberties protections: Ensuring strict oversight for operations involving U.S. citizens.
Intelligence collection restrictions: Limiting when and how U.S. person's information (USPI) could be collected.
Privacy safeguards: Protecting privacy rights and preventing unauthorized data collection.
The 2016 directive centered around intelligence gathering, with no mention of lethal force.
-
New Provisions in the 2024 Version
The 2024 update introduces a dramatic shift, particularly regarding domestic operations. Section 3.3.a.(2)(c) now explicitly permits lethal force in cases of imminent threats or national security emergencies, provided the action complies with legal oversight, specifically DoDD 5210.56, which governs the use of deadly force by DoD personnel.
'''Key updates include:
Use of lethal force: The directive allows military intelligence components to assist law enforcement in operations that involve lethal force.
Conditions for force: The directive specifies lethal force can be used under conditions involving imminent threats.
Legal oversight: Any use of lethal force must comply with DoDD 5210.56, ensuring proper legal frameworks are followed.'''
https://nexusnewsfeed.com/article/geopolitics/dod-directive-5240-01-the-stealth-expansion-of-military-intelligence-powers-in-life-or-death-domestic-scenarios/
>>21768734 Neal Katyal in the DoS FOIA reading room:
Supreme Court Dismisses Case Against Trump's Expired Travel Ban (Barnes, WP) Tuesday, October 10, 2017
Washington Post
By Robert Barnes
Katyal represented Hawaii when they sued PDJT over the travel ban, claiming it was against Musl*ms.
Going after PDJT on IRAP injunction.
International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, 883 F. 3d 233 (4th Cir. 2018),
Military Commission System:
But some Guantanamo critics do want to invent an entirely new way of trying terrorism suspects. In 2008, Neal Katyal, then a Harvard law professor best known for winning the Supreme Court case that struck down the military-commission system, and Jack Goldsmith, an assistant attorney general in the George W. Bush administration, proposed creating a "national-security court" in which federal judges with lifetime tenure would rule on whether the government could detain a suspected terrorist without a formal conviction.
https://foia.state.gov/Search/Results.aspx?searchText=%22katyal%22&beginDate=&endDate=&publishedBeginDate=&publishedEndDate=&caseNumber=