These national guard are sworn to protect against foreign and domestic enemies. ICE and CBP have continually conspired to violate the constitution of the united states, and the orders of the courts. Therefore the action the officers and guard must take is to arrest ICE and let the prosecutor charge them with depravation of rights under color of law.
Perhaps, but unfortunately far too many of the guardsmen see their fellow citizens that have the audacity to disagree with them as domestic enemies. As far as they're concerned, if you don't bend the knee and kiss the jackboot, you're the enemy.
> One function of the National Guard is to quell civil unrest at the behest of the POTUS
Only "to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions" [1]. Otherwise, the National Guard is banned from domestic law enforcment at the command of the President [2].
The Brennan Centre site doesn't show the complete text. Dare I say Trump feels the below warrants the NG? I guess it could be argued that the civil unrest falls within the below reference?
§253. Interference with State and Federal law
The President, by using the militia or the armed forces, or both, or by any other means, shall take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if it—
(1) so hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States within the State, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or
(2) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.
Oh, totally. I’d even argue that interpretation is correct. How we forgot to repeal this law while in power is beyond me, but I guess this is a good stress test.
> How we forgot to repeal this law while in power is beyond me
It's pretty clear that the laws are full of "extraordinary" powers for use in "extraordinary" situations. Jon Stewart has made that point that because of this, most of what Trump has been doing is perfectly legal.
So it's for the next step in the Project 2025 plan: use the protests as an excuse to give the president even more power and take another step towards dictatorship.
I think responses would significantly differ depending on wording and context. Most people probably don't think much about "illegal aliens", and it's the negative wording that makes them instinctively support deportation. Given current events and the scale at which deportations are being carried out, I would suspect a much lower amount of support.
In terms of statistics I could find:
> An AP-NORC poll, conducted from January 9 to 13 among 1,147 adults, found that 83 percent of Americans support deporting migrants living in the U.S. illegally who have been convicted of a violent crime, while only 6 percent would oppose doing so.
> Americans are more split on deporting all undocumented migrants. The poll found that 43 percent support doing so, with 37 percent against.
Still a surprisingly high number but given the qualifier of "all" illegal immigrants, it's definitely not a majority.
That feels a bit like a strawman. Murder has a direct victim while illegal immigration is often just a matter of process.
I'm not American and hold no political opinion on this matter so not really here to argue about the downstream effects - obviously not qualified to so, but there's certainly some more nuance.
Considering the underhanded tactics of showing up to immigration hearings, ignoring the law, ridiculous language (invasion of criminals seriously?) and fascist errata of ICE (masks, body armor, no name tags), you posting that sentence is bullshit.
No 2/3rds of America doesn't support this. If people want to have a reasonable discussion of the loophole to the Posse Comitatus Act they should avoid people who try to manufacture consent like the parent poster.
Protesters need to take a page out of Ukraine's playbook and up their game with drones. Lots and lots of drones, flying high over the heads of ICE agents and their enforcement buddies, dispensing joy to all those below.
Just think of all the amazingly fun, non-violent things that could be dropped from above: Glitter bombs! Water balloons! Balloons filled with other liquids (water soluble paint, blobs of slime, lube, shampoo, etc.). Rubber bouncy balls! Silly String! Bubbles! The list is endless!
The pure entertainment value of a bunch of National Guard members covered in glitter or day-glow green slime, having to back up to keep from slipping on puddles of greasy gunk or superballs just fills me with happiness.
> Lots and lots of drones, flying high over the heads of ICE agents and their enforcement buddies, dispensing joy to all those below
Just document. We need evidence of the individuals at ICE and the National Guard who may be breaking the law so we can, down the road, prosecute them. (Or right now if a Democrat state AG grows a pair.)
Dropping glitter or slime on the National Guard would be incredibly provocative, childish and counterproductive.
As if they're not going to take being recorded as provocation on its own. Or they're going to take an off the shelf drone, strap a spent shotgun casing to it with some duct tape, shoot it a few times, and then proclaim "See? They're targeting us with weaponized drones! We need to bring in the military!"
> As if they're not going to take being recorded as provocation on its own
Someone else being an idiot is irrelevant. Getting provoked by unknown substances being dropped on you is reasonable. Getting provoked by a camera is not.
Except they're the ones getting to decide what's reasonable and what isn't. As far as they're concerned, the rules are like points on Whose Line is it Anyway.
Someone else being an idiot is absolutely relevant when that idiot is the one deciding on what the rules are.
Um, Ukraine is whole country with the backing of a major economic bloc (or two, if you include US as well as EU).
We are lucky folks are showing up at all. Now you want them to spend thousands if not millions or billions on weaponry? Who would they even buy it from, Anduril? Smuggle it from China?
We're talking about the kind of drones you can 3d print most parts of, not the long-range ones that can carry dozens of pounds. Some 3d printed parts, a handful of small servos, an arduino or raspi and a camera module. Not all that expensive.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings
Almost the same time of the year.
Is this the case here?
Only "to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions" [1]. Otherwise, the National Guard is banned from domestic law enforcment at the command of the President [2].
[1] https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/insu...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Guard_%28United_State...
§253. Interference with State and Federal law
The President, by using the militia or the armed forces, or both, or by any other means, shall take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if it—
(1) so hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States within the State, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or
(2) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title10/sub...
Oh, totally. I’d even argue that interpretation is correct. How we forgot to repeal this law while in power is beyond me, but I guess this is a good stress test.
It's pretty clear that the laws are full of "extraordinary" powers for use in "extraordinary" situations. Jon Stewart has made that point that because of this, most of what Trump has been doing is perfectly legal.
In terms of statistics I could find: > An AP-NORC poll, conducted from January 9 to 13 among 1,147 adults, found that 83 percent of Americans support deporting migrants living in the U.S. illegally who have been convicted of a violent crime, while only 6 percent would oppose doing so. > Americans are more split on deporting all undocumented migrants. The poll found that 43 percent support doing so, with 37 percent against.
Still a surprisingly high number but given the qualifier of "all" illegal immigrants, it's definitely not a majority.
I'm not American and hold no political opinion on this matter so not really here to argue about the downstream effects - obviously not qualified to so, but there's certainly some more nuance.
And yet the solution is not to fight poverty, but immigration. Why?
No 2/3rds of America doesn't support this. If people want to have a reasonable discussion of the loophole to the Posse Comitatus Act they should avoid people who try to manufacture consent like the parent poster.
Just think of all the amazingly fun, non-violent things that could be dropped from above: Glitter bombs! Water balloons! Balloons filled with other liquids (water soluble paint, blobs of slime, lube, shampoo, etc.). Rubber bouncy balls! Silly String! Bubbles! The list is endless!
The pure entertainment value of a bunch of National Guard members covered in glitter or day-glow green slime, having to back up to keep from slipping on puddles of greasy gunk or superballs just fills me with happiness.
The TikTok videos would be amazing.
Just document. We need evidence of the individuals at ICE and the National Guard who may be breaking the law so we can, down the road, prosecute them. (Or right now if a Democrat state AG grows a pair.)
Dropping glitter or slime on the National Guard would be incredibly provocative, childish and counterproductive.
Someone else being an idiot is irrelevant. Getting provoked by unknown substances being dropped on you is reasonable. Getting provoked by a camera is not.
Someone else being an idiot is absolutely relevant when that idiot is the one deciding on what the rules are.
Nope, they don’t. Hence the need for documentation.
We are lucky folks are showing up at all. Now you want them to spend thousands if not millions or billions on weaponry? Who would they even buy it from, Anduril? Smuggle it from China?