News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Facebook's Zuckerberg accused of setting dangerous precedent over Trump. Parent comment

Re:Facebook's Zuckerberg accused of setting dangerous preced... by mikeyouse on Tuesday June 02, 2020 @06:22PM (#23397120)
Just for a clarification - the National Guard is typically under the state authority and can be deployed by governors for law enforcement without butting up against the Posse Comitatus act that is invoked with the Insurrection Act. Since DC isn't a state, but still has a national guard, it's a bit of a loophole for the President to be able to deploy national troops inside the District of Columbia like he has done over the last week.

Trump calling to deploy "thousands and thousands" of "heavily armed troops" in US cities is much less obviously legal but hasn't really happened yet.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Facebook's Zuckerberg accused of setting dangerous preced... by vl on Thursday June 04, 2020 @10:11PM (#23424311)
>hasn't really happened yet

23 states deployed national guard in response to protests.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Facebook's Zuckerberg accused of setting dangerous preced... by mikeyouse on Friday June 05, 2020 @12:58PM (#23430706)
Again - the national guard is state directed. The governors of states deployed the national guard in their own states which is perfectly normal. Trump directed the DC national guard to deploy in DC which is mostly normal as well.

The obscene threat from trump was that he was going to deploy active duty military to states as well - which he hasn’t done and which would be unprecedented and extremely dangerous. He and Barr did take a half step by deploying other federal law enforcement in the capitol (DEA/BOP/DHS) which they likely did illegally as those organizations have no statutory authority in crowd control but the military would be an entirely new escalation and one that the joint chiefs / Esper seem to have talked him out of.

[ Parent | on HN ]