by Col. W. Patrick Lang (Ret.)
“Federal military personnel may also be used pursuant to the Stafford Act, 42 U.S.C., section 5121, in times of natural disaster upon request from a state governor. “
This quotation is from a commentary on the “Posse Comitatus Act” of 1878.
Today I listened to a Washington press conference at which several senior speakers asserted that “Posse Comitatus” prevented the direct use of federal troops to assist law enforcement in the present emergency. Hokum!
I am not a lawyer, but it used to be, and maybe still is, that in just about every service school an Army officer attended, a sub-course was taught on military law as it applied to situations that one might encounter. I took that course a number of times beginning at the Infantry School and ending at the War College.
The conditions and hazards of a martial law declaration were always studied. Ironically, a case always considered was the decision of General Andrew Jackson to declare martial law in New Orleans in 1814.
“Posse Comitatus” was always a “biggy.” This was especially true in the ’60s. It was a sobering matter to consider this law in that context. The law was written in the aftermath of the end of the military occupation of the South, the end of the 1st Reconstruction period and the general amnesty of Confederates which happened in the Hayes Administration. This last gave the previously disenfranchised back the ability to hold office and vote.
As soon as the “Bourbons” got back into Congress in strength they did several things. One was to adjourn two years in a row without appropriating money to pay the officers of the Regular Army. Another was to pass a law that forbade the use of Federal troops to enforce civil law.
The intent was pretty clear in both cases. “Posse Comitatus” was intended to prevent further use of US troops in the South to enforce a return to Reconstruction. Over the years the law has become the subject of mythologizing and has become a symbol of civilian freedom from military domination. The law was never intended to apply to the militia of the states and for that reason does not apply to the National Guard which is the federally recognized and partially funded portion of each state’s militia.
MORE BELOW:
The law has been “clarified” a number of times, most notably in the “Stafford Act”cited above.
It is simply not true that federal troops can not be used in the New Orleans and Mississippi situations. It is clear that the state governments are overwhelmed by the scope of the destruction and the consequent lack of the transportation and communications infrastructure.
What should be done is that President Bush should suggest to the governors of the two states that federal troops are available to assist them in re-gaining control of places like New Orleans. A request from each governor would then enable the use of real power, both humanitarian and disciplinary to restore the situation. The Bush Administration knows that this is true. Clearly, they are looking for a minimal involvement. Why? Is it because they have other priorities?
The decision not to return troops of the Louisiana National Guard from Iraq to help their friends and neighbors would point in that direction. Louisiana’s “Tigers” should be allowed to come home.
Pat Lang
Personal Blog: Sic Semper Tyrannis 2005 || Bio || CV
Could it be that this is the present postion of Bush. To do as little as possible? Not to send troops in? This fits their philosophy.
Laissez faire. Bush said the government and the PRIVATE SECTOR will do everything they can for the people affected. The private sector means church groups, his base funded or supported by corporate money.
He’s going to use faith based rescue and recovrey teams instead of the Army and National Guard. Is that what he is thinking?
Psychologically I know he is self destructive but he has been working from the periphery in …toward himself.
This is a destructive act, this negligence toward so many dying.
But it is interesting to me to know if his rationalization is that he should not send federal troops. And this is the South where the act developed from.
What do you think.
I was talking with my mom this afternoon about this very issue and she said “possee comitatus?? we have the PATRIOT Act — didn’t that pretty well disembowel any protections we might have had under posse comitatus??”
I agree with you that the LA Ntl Guard should be able to come home, what they must be going through is cruel and unusual punishment.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency has been a reliable political confederate of the non-libertarian right, particularly in Florida and particularly for this President. One might argue that it is molting into the new Department of Homeland Security.
As an instrument for control of dissent and pork-barrel largesse, the specialties of the day, it is perfect.
The Military, on the other hand, takes the security of the American people seriously, and takes the survival of its own seriously, and so has a kind of mechanical resistance to dangerous pretenses.
The military will not adequately understand the opportunities afforded by the emergency. It will dispatch the problems in the South, which are listed on the appetizer and dessert pages of the menu of challenges the military has prepared to undertake on behalf of this country.
Sending in the military will deflate the problem and inadvertently diminish the stature of the President. Add the onerous accounting regulations of the Pentagon, so hostile to enterprise.
Contrast that to an agency built to the specification of incompetents, simultaneously exacerbating the problems and extorting resources to solve them. In a pinch, it is prepared to direct emergency suppression against political opposition.
What’s to decide?
I think your comment is fabulous.
Emotionally I am ready for a military coup in the United States. Precisely because the military -as awful as it would be- is serious.
Now I know why people have supported military coups in the past. Like the kinds we hear about in South America.
Bush is flying over today in his helicopter. Maybe someone on the ground can use that opportunity to make a point.
Governor gives authorization to shoot, kill hurricane survivor ‘hoodlums’ Raw Story
“300 Arkansas National Guard troops landed in New Orleans — a city literally raped by water and disorder sown by the failure of U.S. relief forces to assist survivors — Thursday evening, with the authorization to shoot and kill what Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco described as “hoodlums.””
Robertson and Gibson should be so proud of this little ‘lady'(wink wink)
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Governor_gives_authorization_to_shoot_kill_hurricane_survivor_ho_0901.
html
Sadly there is more: “They have M-16s and they are locked and loaded.
“These troops know how to shoot and kill and they are more than willing to do so if necessary and I expect they will,” Blanco added.”
MORE THAN WILLING, sounds kind eager ?!?!? What has happened to America ??
and disappear twice. Is this good info? Do you know? And, if so, it seems like a pretty significant story to me. Perhaps diary worthy.
If they shoot at the refugees, I will be on the side of the refugees. I hope they shoot back.
This is going to result in civil unrest all throughtout the country. We are not being told about the tens of thousands of being who were killed and the thousands who are still stranded in and outside their homes.
WHere’s the news coverage?
Amzaing; while I was about to post the following ending in an endorsement of Pat Lang, I had a Windows problem that took me out for about 3-4 hours. Here it is anyway, now that I’m back and found that who posted ahead of me but… Pat Lang!:
OK, folks, you’re mad. So am I.
YES: The situation in New Orleans is terrible and getting worse.
YES: The media are labeling white borrowing and black looting.
YES: The Bush Administration are mostly collectively handling this badly.
YES: The Louisiana NG troops in Iraq should be at home to help.
YES: Mayor Nagin seems to be doing all he can, as are Sen. Landrieu and Gov. Blanco.
YES: 1000 people die on a bridge in Baghdad and the UN gets relief within a day.
YES: Bush has screwed up the country by misdirecting assets so badly that we can’t respond properly to an internal crisis.
YES: Bush did it; not Clinton, who increased the levee funds for the N.O. area till Bush cut them back since 2002.
YES: Bush MUST pay the price for this……. [add your complaints here]
Eventually.
BUT: FOCUS, mofo’s!
BUT: Let’s concentrate on getting food and water in NOW as first priority, and evacuation as second. Why can’t choppers deliver goods inbound and take out the sickest outbound?
BUT: Looting/stealing/borrowing essentials like food, water, diapers, clothing and the like is NOT a crime. Taking TV’s, guns, and other non-essentials IS a crime. Shooting people is a crime. Shooting at rescue choppers is a crime. Once proper authorities [police, fire, military] arrive on the scene, refusal to surrender temporary “militia” guns and authority IS a crime, punishible by instant death, once such authorities have provided proof of authority to show that they’re not just another gang… drop your guns when you see it’s the cops or the army!
Let’s get this straight: If frustrated armed mobs or individuals are shooting at rescue and/or supply or evacuation buses or choppers, the rescuers are justified in refusing to enter that zone, and the govt at any level is justified in authorizing orders to shoot back if shot at. Sort it out later. There MUST be some semblance of order before rescue people can be sent in to do relief operations. They are correct IN REFUSING TO ENTER ZONES WHERE THEY WILL BE SHOT AT.
Too many posts at too many blogs spew unfocused anger and venom. I’m angry too, and as a Vietnam 68 Tet vet, I opposed the Iraq invasion in early 2002 for the same reasons that most people just seem to be waking up to now. Where were all you righteous dips & jerks when it might have counted last November in the voting booth ? OK; I know many of you WERE there, but I’m addressing the absent.
We need to take back our country and re-establish the principles on which it was founded.
I’ve not listed a reply address* because I’m 64 and don’t want to be a playground monitor. As on SNL with the Mike Myers thing, “I’m all verklempt; discuss among yourselves.”
However, I AM a VMI graduate, class of 1962. I HIGHLY recommend you tune in daily to my Brother Rat Pat Lang’s Blog. Read the About. He was highly focussed even in those days. You may not agree with him on everything, but when it comes to the matters he expresses opinions on, 99+% of the time, he knows more than you do. In this one, he discusses the Katrina situation. Most of his posts concern Iraq and the Middle East.
http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/
From my VMI Brother Rat’s excellent blog, try this one:
Posse Comitatus and the Use of Troops
“Federal military personnel may also be used pursuant to the Stafford Act, 42 U.S.C., section 5121, in times of natural disaster upon request from a state governor. ”
Then go back and read the rest for an education and if needed do an autocranialrectoextraction.
Hoping for a higher level of discourse;
Not holding my breath while waiting,
Reverend Zafod aka Diverdan Prall.
*I welcome feedback from the few who know me.
And you didn’t think stuff at a distance affected you. Wait till next time you go to the gas station…. of course, Bush Buddies just get richer every time you’re screwed.
now the media is not telling the truth.
Shots being fired should not scare soldiers in helicopters. That’s what they are trained to deal with, they are not permitted to run when fired on.
I am sure reports of guns going off is wildly exaggerated and purposefully so. They are going to use that as an excuse to being unprepared.
This “security” language is an attempt to play upon the fears americans have of 911. In my neighborhood, I hear shots fired on occasion.
What’s the big deal? THey are going to run from teenagers with guns who don’t know how to use them?
Was I hallucinating last summer, or were U.S. military personel used to protect Republicans from the peaceful protesters at their convention?
And by the way, I just read this morning, that not only has the U.S. rejected help from Canada and Jamaica, but now Russia has offered help with Katrina and the Bush admin. said ‘no thanks we can handle it’
Thanks for this crucial detail.