Though I guess the loop hole here is that the National Guard would in this case be acting under "state authority" given that typically state-like actions for DC are deferred to Congress. The open question being whether the Executive branch could act independently, or whether they still need explicit authorization from Congress.
"The Act does not prevent the Army National Guard or the Air National Guard under state authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within its home state or in an adjacent state if invited by that state's governor. The United States Coast Guard (under the Department of Homeland Security) is not covered by the Act either, primarily because although it is an armed service, it also has a maritime law enforcement mission."
It's confusing because DC does not have a governor so it looks like an edge case that has not been tested before.
the DC national guard is under the direct command of the president. The law may use the words "state" and "governor" but I'd take the other side of any bet that says that will be interpreted to mean that the president doesn't have the authority to deploy the DC guard in DC because of the posse comitatus act.
Suffice to say that before this morning I had only a vague idea about how legally complicated this could get. For instance, there's an opinion from the Department of Justice (albeit an old one) that concluded that the President can use the DC National Guard for law enforcement purposes (in that case, drug interdiction) without running afoul of the Posse Comitatus Act.
"One set of troops, the District of Columbia National Guard, has historically operated as the equivalent of a state militia (under Title 32 of the United States Code) not subject to Posse Comitatus Act restrictions, even though it is a federal entity under the command of the President and the Secretary of the Army."
This ruling has been widely misinterpreted. It does not mean that the president can make an unlawful declaration and that the National Guard, for example, must follow it even though the declaration is inconsistent with the law.
That said, it’s not immediately clear to me that this would be illegal. The National Guard and the District of Columbia is a unique edge case because D.C. is not a state.
To be clear I don’t like this move nor where it is going. I’m not endorsing it, only trying to understand the legal basis.
You're right, but if someone down the chain of command refuses to obey a declaration they consider illegal, the president can (and will) just repeatedly fire people until someone does what he wants.
We're talking about the military. In the worst case he can do a lot more than fire people for their disobedience. He's already indicated publicly that he believes General Mark Milley ought to be hung, although to date his efforts to end the general have not gone further than removing his security detail. (the general is believed to be an assassination target of Iran...)
And to go back to the original comment, the president cannot be prosecuted for doing any of this since it's part of his "official duties." I'd expect this Supreme Court to walk back the specifics of this ruling the moment a Democratic president starts pushing the limits, however.
Any administration member can be pardoned by Trump for following illegal instructions, and Trump cannot be charged for a crime if it’s ‘related to the official duties of being the President.’
How is that not a blank check to do whatever you want? Anyone that breaks the law can be pardoned later and Trump has immunity.
Even if Trump isn’t the one, this means we are ready for our Caesar and fall of the Republic.
Of course I think we’ve been sliding toward our decadent imperial phase for quite some time. This did not materialize out of nowhere. The Executive long ago took the power to declare war from Congress, at least in practice, and that was one of the first huge steps.
Personally I think Trump will die, there will be a power struggle, and it will be one of the next few. There’s even some chance it could be a left-populist authoritarian. Political winds can shift fast in an environment like this.
Rome, for all its might was puny in comparison to the United States. The downfall and/or breakup of the USA will leave the world in pieces. If it happens - which I really hope it will not, though I don't see how at this point it is still unavoidable - millions of people will die the world over. Every two bit dictator will see their chance and grab it knowing the next opportunity to do so will be at least a century away. The number of democracies and the number of people living in an (actual) democracy is already a minority. Democracy may well soon become an endangered species in the zoo of possible governments.
China will probably rise up in our place, which is why I think MAGA just handed the world to China.
In that first state of the union when he talked about a golden age I was like “yeah, this is the Chinese century. He’s gonna burn it down.” Literally gilding the White House is a caricature of how you’d depict the fall of an empire in bad fiction. An editor would say that was cliche.
China is going through its own issues at the moment. Larger numbers of people are rising up against the CCP and recent events are becoming more and more frequent. Their government is predictably cracking down harder on its citizens. But you could be right, just not with the CCP but rather whatever government takes its place soon. The riots have not yet reached their precipice but it's getting nasty.
A more liberal and open Chinese government would be exactly what they need if they want to take the place of the USA on the world stage. Of course a revolution is not guaranteed to produce that. Revolutions often end with a new boss worse than the old boss. But it could. It's a dice roll, a high risk thing, which is why people have to be pushed really hard to do it.
It helps the US for China to have its own "make China great again" revanchist authoritarian CCP. It slows their overall growth and keeps them from engaging with the world. Walls are for losers. Global mercantile empires must be porous and outward facing. This porosity becomes the main source of their soft power and causes them to export their culture globally.
If China starts allowing a little more immigration that would turbocharge their rise, since every immigrant community inside China becomes the terminal end of a line of influence reaching back to wherever they came from.
If they don't liberalize then who knows. Maybe the US will decide to remove the shot gun from its mouth, in which case the window will close.
For what it's worth it will probably be quite a while before China reaches the Make China Great Again phase. At the moment they have not even reached the Stop Bludgeoning Citizens Again.
> Larger numbers of people are rising up against the CCP and recent events are becoming more and more frequent.
Do you have a source on that, preferably one that's not quoting a cult like the chinese version of scientology, not uploading daily china-will-collaspse-soon videos, not a tankie, or other random type of propaganda/fanboy outlet?
Just videos that leak out of China. Be sure to save what you find if yt-dlp [1] supports it as YT are taking them down or flagging them as adult. I put them in my 4chan collection.
As a side note, if you are really part of Antifa and if they are really under the control of who I think they are then just get your handler to reach out and have your team assigned to China. Are you proficient in Mandarin? They who shall not be named should already have loads of videos. Be safe.
I'm not sure what exactly the orders were, but Calley, one of the My Lai massacre war criminals was in fact convicted. But many others who should have been convicted were not.
Calley claimed he was following orders from Medina (his SO) but Medina denied giving them.
Trump has pardoned several people who attempted to breach the capital and murder elected representatives to stop the ratification of a democratic presidential election.
All he needs is a single paper that says "All members of the military following the orders of President Trump are pardoned for all crimes past and future related to said orders" and - boom - accountability gone!
For now. But there is no reason why a future government of the USA would not see that in an entirely different light. After all, those that went to trial after WWII also argued that their actions were legal and it turned out not to be the case.
There is no legal mechanism for unpardoning someone, the constitution only allows it to go one way. It would require an amendment, and we can't even pass laws with this legislature.
And for good reason, mind you. Same reason as dismissal without prejudice gets some flak as easily abused for corrupt leverage.
A future government is not necessarily bound to the one the preceded it depending on the way the one government changed into the other. And the way things are going right now there is a non-zero chance that the USA will see a reboot of its system of government, if it doesn't actually fall apart into multiple different countries.
Though I guess the loop hole here is that the National Guard would in this case be acting under "state authority" given that typically state-like actions for DC are deferred to Congress. The open question being whether the Executive branch could act independently, or whether they still need explicit authorization from Congress.