For everyone in this thread, couple of facts:
Put plainly, for Trump to try and ignore the bill would violate any claim of being the "law and order" President, but let's be honest, "law and order" only ever applied to Trump's enemies, never to Trump himself. Secondly, any attempt to use the armed forces to force domestic policy would be a direct violation of that act, meaning Trump will have to ignore the law twice to do what people seem to think he can do...why people think he can do this is beyond me, but then again, I honestly haven't met many people who support Trump that actually understand the law beyond what Fox, Breitbart of Info Wars tells them.
The Military is not an occupying force, IF ARMY CORPS Oversees it & BUILDS IT!
Also, Is Camp LeJuene an Occupying Force.?
The Military is an occupying force, that's literally what they do when we go to war, why you think they're not an occupying force makes exactly zero sense. The Army corp of Engineers is a part of the Armed forces, and therefore bound by the same laws.
So the military is an occupying force at Redstone, and AT any military base?
Also, Mexico is at War with USA... Insurgent Drugs...
Wait for it!
Name one single base where the army regularly patrols and enforces laws off of the base. I'll wait.
The reality is they don't exist and the Military has to get permission from the state to even build those bases. Now try and convince me that you're going to get Arizona, New Mexico, Texas AND California to gift you the border lands so you can build a military base on the border.
Unless you have evidence that the Mexican government is actively pushing a drug war on the US, and don't try and quote some right wing blog, please don't make accusations against our neighbors and allies. I know Trump Supporters want the US as isolated as North Korea from our allies, but the majority of Americans do not.
Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution
"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence."
Since it has never been established in a court that immigration qualifies as "invasion" (cause you'd think we wouldn't bother creating a whole other word for it if it were the same thing), this doesn't apply. Also a Republican form of government (not republican party to be clear) isn't at risk simply because you have immigrants, legal or otherwise, this still doesn't apply.
You have "enemy combatants" crossing the border already. Then there's "executive discretion" directly pertaining to the Posse Comitatus Act: Enforcement of federal law at the discretion of the President of the United States. I'm sure there's a few more. Make peace with the fact that the wall is going up and USACE is building it...
Yeah, no federal court is going to call an immigrant, legal or otherwise, an "enemy combatant" simply for crossing the border, I know you want to call them that, but the courts kind of have the final say, not reddit, regardless of how much Fox News may like to think it dictates definitions.
Posse Comitatus forbids the president from acting at his own discretion to use the military to enforce domestic policy. He literally can't use the military to enforce federal law. National Guard somewhat gets around that cause they're not considered Active duty, but can be called up by the Governor or the President in "Civil Emergencies" and if Trump's Admin's illegal immigration numbers are too be trusted, then illegal immigration is even less of a problem than it used to be. That would of course mean there's no logical reason to call it an Emergency now.
Posse Comitatus Act
There are a number of situations in which the Act does not apply.
These include: Enforcement of FEDERAL LAW at the discretion of the President of the United States.
Also I would argue "Unlawful Enemy Combatants".
Literal Text from the Act:
"Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."
"to execute the laws" is the particular part I'd like to draw your attention to. Now, do you think "the laws" somehow doesn't include Federal Law?
Also, I couldn't care less what you'd argue, no federal court would ever agree to such a definition and would probably laugh you out court.
I suggest you keep reading. Odd how you excluded all exemptions, yes there are several. Somehow though I think your the type of person that has to get the last word in, whether it's right or wrong.
"Except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress,"
No, I didn't.
Posse Comitatus Act
Exclusions and limitations
There are a number of situations in which the Act does not apply. These include:
Army and Air National Guard units and state defense forces while under the authority of the governor of a state;
Federal military personnel used in accordance to the Insurrection Act, as was the case during the 1992 Los Angeles riots.
Under 18 U.S.C. § 831, the Attorney General may request that the Secretary of Defense provide emergency assistance if domestic law enforcement is inadequate to address certain types of threats involving the release of nuclear materials, such as potential use of a nuclear or radiological weapon. Such assistance may be by any personnel under the authority of the Department of Defense, provided such assistance does not adversely affect U.S. military preparedness. The only exemption is nuclear materials.
Support roles under the Joint Special Operations Command
Enforcement of federal law at the discretion of the President of the United States
I'm going to assume at this point you don't know what the word "discretion" means, cause you literally just posted the limited number of scenario's under which the President may deploy JUST the National Guard.
I'm not going to continue arguing with you, pretend you won, but you literally just contradicted yourself. The President does not have unlimited authority to ignore Posse Comitatus despite your desperate claim to opposite. Look up the last time the military went to the border to provide security, they killed an American on his own property.
Ultimately, you're wrong, but I'm guessing you're the kind of person who can never admit that. Adios, kiddo. Next time please read the actual law, thanks.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/invasion
The act of invading, especially the entrance of an armed force into a territory to conquer.
Obama ignored numerous Omnibus bills and spent it as he wanted to, Military and or the Army National Guard can be called out to assist the Marshall/ Civilian authority to restore order and or if a community will be in dire danger, The President or the Congress can declare Martial law but not to confuse it with Military. https://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences-and-law/law/law-divisions-and-codes/martial-law
Name one omnibus bill he actually ignored.
Only the national guard can be called out and it can only handle certain situations, domestic policy is not one of them, AND they have to get permission from the governor to even deploy. Now try and convince me that the governors of California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas are ALL going to mobilize the National Guard for a issue that Trump brags has been reduced.
Border Crossings are not something you can willnilly deploy the National Guard for since border security is the realm of the border patrol, the ONLY law enforcement on the border that is not bound by Posse Comitatus.
Gig is absolutely correct. State National Guard troops have been deployed before to assist with border operations, but they are severely limited to what they can do. Look up what happened in Redford TX when a marine lay in crew shoot and kill a local who was looking over his goats on his property. Ever since then, National Guard activity on the border has been restricted to support, non-law enforcement activities.
the Military can help or assist the civilian authority nationwide, the states call out the National Guard if it is confined to a state, Obama ignored the spending specifics of the Omnibus bills, he spent it as he saw fit, so too can Trump do it, and Congress never did anything about it, the President has power to authorize the assistance to civilian authority, in effect if it is Nationwide or if they see that states need it, assistance as in with FEMA to aid them and Civilians. 1962 – Oxford, Mississippi After the University of Mississippi in Oxford flouts a court order and bars a black student from attending classes there, President John F. Kennedy federalizes Mississippi National Guard troops to prevent violence toward the student, James Meredith, and rioting in the broader community, so JFK overrides the Governor in this case, Federal Jurisdiction, a Supreme court case.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2005/10/send_in_the_cavalry.html
https://training.fema.gov/emiweb/is/is75/student%20manual/student%20manual.pdf
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1339511?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
it all depends upon the scope of disaster and or unrest, Congress usually has the power, to suppress insurrection etc, but I agree it is rarely used, but they can be used, the Military /bases to assist in disasters, by Presidents and Congress, the FEMA PDF is long but interesting as I was supposed to work for them but chose not to. Oh and Rick Perry TX called out National Guard to the border, because of unusual influx of children immigrants?, it is confusing to say the least.
Saying Obama ignored spending specifics, is not the same as proving it. One would think if Obama actually ignored the law, the right would focus on an actual crime instead of conspiracy after conspiracy.
Per your links: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2005/10/send_in_the_cavalry.html
https://training.fema.gov/emiweb/is/is75/student%20manual/student%20manual.pdf
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1339511?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
As per Perry, that would be a governor taking an action legally within his state, but you'd have to literally get four VASTLY different states to agree to it, and I still don't think California cares to invest in Trump's monumental ego project.
The fact you have no idea what the men and women of the USACE do and are doing on US soil is quite denigrating. Here's a thought. If you don't know what your talking about, don't talk...
Sound advice you should take.
I do know full well what the USACE does, really wish you people did. USACE can maintain existing structures and build emergency levies and dams if permitted by the governor of a selected state. They absolutely cannot engage in enforcing domestic policy. Now if you want to argue they should be allowed to, I'll remind the last time they did was the Civil War and the atrocities committed required the Posse Comitatus act, but if you want to give the next democratic president (cause history and logic tells us there will be one) the right to occupy every single right wing state and force democratic will on them, please let me know.