Read on Twitter
Some required reading – and a few thoughts of my own – on Trump’s threats to send federal troops into U.S. cities in response to the protests. 1/13
On whether Trump has the legal authority to deploy troops (spoiler alert: yes), see this pithy thread by @steve_vladeck… 2/13 https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/status/1266752517167370240
…and this excellent post by @marknevitt on @just_security, which also goes into the rules of engagement once troops are deployed: 3/13 https://www.justsecurity.org/70482/the-president-the-military-and-minneapolis-what-you-need-to-know/
On whether Trump *should* deploy troops, and concerns about using the military (including the National Guard, whether in state or federalized status) to police protests, this piece by @kenklippenstein in @thenation has some eye-opening quotes: 4/13 https://www.thenation.com/article/society/national-guard-defense-department-protests/
On the relationship between invoking the Insurrection Act (which is what Trump is contemplating here) and declaring martial law, see this piece by my @BrennanCenter colleague @joesphanunn in @thehill: 5/13 https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/491155-can-the-president-declare-martial-law-in-response-to-coronavirus
On how the Insurrection Act fits into the broader framework of presidential emergency powers, see my piece in @TheAtlantic: 6/13 https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/01/presidential-emergency-powers/576418/
What all of these pieces tell us is that Congress has given the president broad authority under the Insurrection Act to deploy federal troops (either active duty or federalized National Guard) to quell civil unrest. 7/13
This authority overrides the Posse Comitatus Act, a law that would otherwise bar law enforcement activities by the military. (But as long as troops are supplementing civilian law enforcement rather than supplanting it, that’s not martial law.) 8/13
The Constitution contemplates that there might be cases in which military force is necessary to suppress domestic violence. But as we’ve seen historically, it’s a worst-case scenario and should be a last resort. 9/13
Involving the military actually increases the potential for violent clashes with civilians. However badly some police have acted in these protests, military forces are *trained* to take down the enemy, not to keep communities safe. 10/13
The public statements of this president endorsing violence against the protesters will exacerbate the inherent dangers of domestic military deployment. And of course, there’s the risk that he’ll deploy troops selectively for partisan political reasons. 11/13
What all of this means in the short term is that we must be vigilant. The deployment of troops by Trump would probably be legal, but that hardly ends the matter. There are major risks involved, and we must be alert to the potential for abuse. 12/13
In the longer term, Congress should revisit the Insurrection Act. It’s far too easy to invoke this power, and there are no effective legislative or judicial checks. When tanks roll into U.S. cities, Congress and the courts must be empowered to intervene if there is abuse. 13/13
