NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/sci/military/12698

Text File | 1993-01-21 | 3.7 KB | 75 lines

Newsgroups: sci.military
Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!hubcap!ncrcae!ncrhub2!ciss!law7!military
From: Dan Simkins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Scope of Action-US Military
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Keywords: US Military
Sender: [e-mail] (Sci.Military Login)
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 18:34:49 GMT
Approved: [e-mail]
Lines: 61


From Dan Simkins <[e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jerry Han) writes:
|>
|> From Jerry Han <[e-mail]>
|>
|> >From "Rex A. Buddenberg" <[e-mail]>
|> >
|> >During the Reagan administration, Posse Comatatus  Posse Comatatus was amended to
|> >apply uniformly to all the DoD services and to expressly allow DoD
|> >to provide surveillance, intelligence, logistics, C3I ... kinds
|> >of support - but short of direct law enforcement.  This results
|> >in Navy ships carrying around USCG boarding parties who perform
|> >the boarding party functions.  During Desert Shield the sword
|> >cut the other direction -- USCG boarding perties were dispatched
|> >to the MidEast Force to ride Navy ships and lead boarding parties
|> >enforcing the Iraqi embargo -- an act of war, not a law enforcement op.
|>
|> This is the part I was looking for- the specific question was along the
|> lines of:  Could the US President (as C-in-C) order Federal troops to
|> operate within US Territorial borders?
|>
|> I'm assuming that he can, but there's enough of a question mark around it
|> that I want to be sure.
|>

I was curious about the use of Federal military troops during the LA riots.
 I had a vague recollection of the  Posse Comatatus law, but I did not know
its name.  Thus, I was unable to find it in the library to read it.  However,
I do have a copy of the U.S.Constitution, and I checked it.  I do not have i
in front of me right now, so I will only be paraphrasing.  What it said was
that the President, if petitioned by a state's Governor or Legislature was
required to defend against foreign invaders and domestic violence.  Since
there was no federal police force in those days, the military was the
only thing at the President's disposal.  Hence, if asked it appears the
Constitution requires the President to deploy federal military troops on U.S.
soil.  Obviously this is my interpretation of the Constitution, if there is
someone who knows of any Supreme Court rulings, I would appreciate
a reference.

  Note I keep refering to federal military troops.  I am unsure if the following
is correct, it is my best guess. I made the distinction here from the state's
militia, which now goes under the name of the National Guard.  These troops,
unless called into regular military service, are under control of the Governor
of the state. So, a governor can call out the National Guard for police work,
such as riot control, ( as seen in the Attica Prison riots in NY, the
Kent State riots, etc), and to prevent looting ( often done during
natural disasters ).

Back to the LA riots, Governor Wilson called up the CA National Guard, and also
requested Federal help, which President Bush sent in the form of FBI, and Marines
( maybe others ).  As far as I know, there are no Marines in the National Guard
( I believe they are all Army ), so in this case we had Federal military troops
operating on U.S. soil.

If there is anyone who has a good reference on exactly how the National Guard
fits into the civilian command structure, as well as a reference on the
Posse Comatatus law, I would like to hear about it.