PDA

View Full Version : Bush Considered Violating Posse Comitatus Law




FrankRep
07-27-2009, 05:23 AM
Bush Considered Violating Posse Comitatus Law (http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/politics/1516)


Thomas R. Eddlem | The New American (http://www.thenewamerican.com/)
27 July 2009


President Bush considered ignoring the long-standing and explicit prohibition against using military forces within U.S. territory, the New York Times reported (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/25/us/25detain.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=bush%20militaryu&st=cse) on July 25. The deployment of military forces against U.S. civilians was banned by the Posse Comitatus law (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1385.html), which was enacted shortly after Civil War reconstruction ended. President Bush reportedly considered using military forces to arrest five suspected terrorists near Buffalo, N.Y., in September 2002, despite the law.

The New York Times noted that “A decision to dispatch troops into the streets to make arrests has few precedents in American history, as both the Constitution and subsequent laws restrict the military from being used to conduct domestic raids and seize property.”

Though President Bush eventually decided not to use U.S. troops in that case, the U.S. Justice Department had concluded Bush had the power to engage the military on U.S. soil. The Justice Department memorandum, written by “torture lawyer” John Yoo and Robert J. Delahunty, concluded (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/25/us/25detain.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=bush%20militaryu&st=cse) that despite Posse Comitatus “the president has ample constitutional and statutory authority to deploy the military against international or foreign terrorists operating within the United States.” John Yoo had been the U.S. attorney who authored the “torture memo,” a 2002 Justice Department memorandum that all but defined torture out of legal existence for detainees.

According to the New York Times, Vice President Dick Cheney pushed for President Bush to authorize the use of troops in that case, but was overruled by the President.


SOURCE:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/politics/1516

nobody's_hero
07-27-2009, 05:30 AM
I thought Bush already did do away with posse comitatus. I seem to recall a post here on RPF that it had been suspended.

coyote_sprit
07-27-2009, 05:31 AM
Yeah Katrina was just a consideration.

nobody's_hero
07-27-2009, 05:34 AM
Maybe that's what I remember. It gets so hard to tell whenever they throw it around so much. Of course, if they did do away with it, 99% of Americans wouldn't even notice. :(

LibertyEagle
07-27-2009, 06:22 AM
I thought Bush already did do away with posse comitatus. I seem to recall a post here on RPF that it had been suspended.

That was my understanding, also.

Dr.3D
07-27-2009, 07:18 AM
Not to worry though, if the use of troops against the citizens of the U.S. were ever needed by the government, they would just bring in troops from another country to do the job.

FrankRep
07-27-2009, 07:31 AM
From Wikipedia about Posse Comitatus Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act)


Recent legislative events

On September 26, 2006, President Bush urged Congress to consider revising federal laws so that U.S. armed forces could restore public order and enforce laws in the aftermath of a natural disaster, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

These changes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act#Amendments_of_2006) were included in the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Warner_National_Defense_Authorization_Act_for _Fiscal_Year_2007) (H.R. 5122 (http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.uscongress/legislation.109hr5122)), which was signed into law on Oct 17, 2006, subsequently repealed in their entirety.

Section 1076 is titled "Use of the Armed Forces in major public emergencies". It provided that:


The President may employ the armed forces... to... restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition... the President determines that... domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order... or [to] suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such... a condition... so hinders the execution of the laws... 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... or opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws. (http://www.govtrack.us/data/us/bills.text/109/h/h5122.pdf)

The actual text is on pages 322–323 of the legislation.

As of 2008, these changes have been repealed in their entirety (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act#Repeal_of_amendments), reverting to the previous wording of the Insurrection Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act). (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-4986)