Posse Comitatus Act is not a minor matter.

This will be the next adjustment in our war on terror. Can anyone explain why our government needs the ability to send our army and air force against our citizenry, or how giving such power to whatever administration happens to be in office will make us safer?

Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, the U.S. military has been taking on more domestic security responsibilities. Soldiers have been stationed at airports, and military jets are now patrolling the skies over Washington, New York, and other cities. The Bush administration has directed lawyers in the departments of Justice and Defense to review the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 and any other laws that restrict the military's role in domestic law enforcement. Is the Posse Comitatus Act out of date�or is it more important than ever before? How might the military enhance security? What are the implications for civil liberties? Please join us for a debate concerning the role of the military in homeland security.

www.cato.org...

The [PCA] expresses one of the clearest political traditions in Anglo-American history: that using military power to enforce the civilian law is harmful to both civilian and military interests. The authors of the [PCA] drew upon a melancholy history of military rule for evidence that even the best intentioned use of the Armed Forces to govern the civil population may lead to unfortunate consequences. They knew, moreover, that military involvement in civilian affairs consumed resources needed for national defense and drew the Armed Forces into political and legal quarrels that could only harm their ability to defend the country. Accordingly, they intended that the Armed Forces be used in law enforcement only in those serious cases to which the ordinary processes of civilian law were incapable of responding.

law.wustl.edu...


Respects,

[edit on 17-9-2004 by John bull 1]

I would say that one of the reason the PCA needs to be reviewed is so that there can be no argument against using National Guard and Reserve forces to protect our borders.

Weak border security is not something we can be lax aboout nowadays. From what I understand of the PCA, it should not prevent Guard and Reserve troops from doing this job, however some have argued that it does. If the Act is to prevent the military from acting as a police force, arresting US citizens, then I whole-heartedly agree with that position. If one was to attempt to use this Act to keep us from making sure we are safe in our own country, then that I have a problem with.

How weak is the PCA to begin with?

SEC. 15. From and after the passage of this act it shall not be lawful to employ any part of the Army of the United States, as a posse comitatus, or otherwise, for the purpose of executing the laws, except in such cases and under such circumstances as such employment of said force may be expressly authorized by the Constitution or by act of Congress; and no money appropriated by this act shall be used to pay any of the expenses incurred in the employment of any troops in violation of this section And any person willfully violating the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction thereof shall be punished by fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars or imprisonment not exceeding two years or by both such fine and imprisonment.

Notice the "except in such cases and under such circumstances as such employment of said force may be expressly authorized by the Constitution or by act of Congress..."

It would seem that anytime Congress authorizes it or a president can justify it constitutionally - the government can set aside PCA and deploy troops at home for policing purposes. While I think SCOTUS would take a dim view of a president acting unilaterally on his own - the Congressional provision is particulary frightening. When you look at Congress's overwhelming support for the Patriot Act, you have to ask if they would put up much a fight if the president asked them for an exception to PCA?

IMO if PCA is set aside for a particular need - there needs to be a sunset provisions, as well as clearly defined scope and authority provision.

If they are to use the Guard and Reserve for protecting our borders, then they need to specificaly say that is what they are for. At the same time they are doing that, another provision should be created to set up stronger border security, either via an improved Border Patrol, and or physical barriers.