Bush Weighs Deploying Guard to U.S. Border/Now to Call for Guard Troops on Border

[Snowden]

Bush Weighs Deploying Guard to U.S. Border
By LOLITA C. BALDOR, Associated Press Writer



Once again the Bush administration is turning to the military to help solve a domestic problem. But instead of hurricane aid or preparations to cope with avian flu, the Pentagon is being asked to possibly provide thousands of National Guard troops to shore up the U.S. border with Mexico, as part of President Bush's effort to gather support for an overhaul of the nation's immigration laws.
According to senior administration officials, Bush is considering plans to use federal funds to pay for National Guard troops deployed along the southern border.
One defense official said military leaders believe the number of troops required could range from 3,500 to perhaps 10,000, depending on the final plan. Another administration official cautioned that the 10,000 figure was too high.
The officials insisted on anonymity since no decision has been announced.
The president was expected to reveal his plans in an address Monday at 8 p.m. EDT. It will be the first time he has used the Oval Office for a domestic policy speech — a gesture intended to underscore the importance he places on the divisive immigration issue.
The key questions Friday were exactly how many National Guard troops might be deployed, for how long and at what cost to federal taxpayers — as well as the problem of possible disruption of upcoming deployments to Iraq and elsewhere overseas.
As discussions among the White House, the Pentagon and the states continued on how the military could be used to secure the southern border, defense officials said that states want the federal government to pick up what will be a significant tab for the increased security. Officials had no estimates on that cost.
Bush's speech Monday night is intended to build support for broad immigration overhaul by taking substantive steps to secure the border. His focus on the military echoes statements he made after Hurricane Katrina, saying the military may need to play a stronger role in disasters. He also later suggested he would consider using the military to enforce a quarantine in the event of a bird flu pandemic.
"We need to beef up those (border) operations and the cost will be substantial," said Sen. John Cornyn (news, bio, voting record), R-Texas, in an interview. "People are just not going to accept comprehensive immigration reform unless they are assured the government is going to secure the border. People have lost confidence in the federal government because they simply haven't addressed this in a dramatic and effective way."
Paul McHale, assistant secretary of defense for homeland defense, asked officials earlier this week to offer options for the use of military resources and troops — particularly the National Guard — along the border with Mexico, according to defense officials familiar with the discussions.
Cornyn said state officials are also looking for more unmanned aircraft, ground sensors, surveillance cameras and military training to help with border patrols.
Defense officials said the National Guard may be used only until significant additions to the existing civilian border patrols can be fully funded and completed.
Currently there are about 100 National Guard troops involved in counter-drug operations, including some along the border, said Guard Bureau spokesman Jack Harrison. He said there are also between 10 to 15 Guard members — mostly engineers — helping border patrol agents with vehicle and heavy equipment support.
The discussions this week underscored the importance of the border and immigrations issues, yet were tentative enough to reflect worries about drawing the nation's armed forces into a politically sensitive domestic role.
Southern lawmakers met with White House strategist Karl Rove earlier in the week for a discussion that included making greater use of National Guard troops to shore up border control. And on Capitol Hill, the Senate is poised to pass legislation this month that would call for additional border security, a new guest worker program and provisions opening the way to eventual citizenship for many of the estimated 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants in the country.
Currently, the military plays a very limited role along the borders, but some active duty forces have been used in the past to help battle drug traffickers.
The National Guard is generally under the control of the state governors, but Guard units can be federalized by the president, such as those sent to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Active duty military may not be used for law enforcement unless the president authorizes it.

___
AP White House correspondent Terence Hunt contributed to this report.
___
On the Net: Defense Department: http://www.defenselink.mil




http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060513/...border_defense

[Bluehawk]

He needs to cease the "weighing" and give the dang order.

[DocDiggs]

Originally Posted by Bluehawk

He needs to cease the "weighing" and give the dang order.

It isn't that simple. I've posted the act to which this "order" would have to
conform. The law was originally post-Civil War for very good reasons. It is the foundation law which is intended to prevent the deployment of regular military troops into the general population to act as police agents. An excellent law, I might add. The NG may be used as required, but only at the direction of a state's governor...NOT the president unless federalized. Nor can one state's NG cross their state's border into another state unless federalized by law. This then becomes questionable under the Posse Comitatus Act...federal troops acting as police within the US.

Even if the various state's NG troops are used within their own state, the problem arises that they are not regular, bull time, but rather "weekend" soldiers with regular day/night jobs. To federalize these people would create monumental problems as to their jobs, for their employers, families, pay and benefits, and so on.

This pure Bush/Rove politics. Do something...anything to shut people up and divert attention from the real problems at hand. The obvious solution rather than NG or federalised NG or reservists...most of whom are either in or have been in Afghanistan or Iraq (not to mention our other committments). Is to deoble or triple our regular border security personnel. Cheaper in the longrun, less complicated, therefore less probablility of screwing up the lives of NG people, and they would be permanent, not temporary.

OVERVIEW OF THE POSSE COMITATUS ACT

This appendix provides a broad overview of the Posse Comitatus Act,
which restricts the participation of the military in domestic law
enforcement activities under many circumstances.

LANGUAGE
The origins of “posse comitatus” are to be found in domestic law.
Black's Law Dictionary defines the term “posse comitatus” as:
the power or force of the county. The entire population of a county
above the age of fifteen, which a sheriff may summon to his assistance
in certain cases as to aid him in keeping the peace, in pursuing
and arresting felons, etc.1

The Posse Comitatus Act, 18 U.S. Code, Section 1385, an original
intent of which was to end the use of federal troops to police state
elections in former Confederate states, proscribes the role of the
Army and Air Force in executing civil laws and states:
Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly
authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any
part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise
______________
1 Lujan (1997) notes that the commander of JTF-LA mistakenly believed his activities
were subject to Posse Comitatus restrictions when they were not.
244 Preparing the U.S. Army for Homeland Security
to execute the laws shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned
not more than two years, or both
.
2 According to Lujan (1997), the Air Force was added to the original
language in 1956. Although the Navy and Marine Corps are not
included in the act, they were made subject to it by DoD Regulation
(32 C.F.R. Section 213.2, 1992).

KEY EXCEPTIONS TO THE POSSE COMITATUS ACT
A summary of key exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act follows:3
• National Guard forces operating under the state authority of Title
32 (i.e., under state rather than federal service) are exempt from
Posse Comitatus Act restrictions
.
• Pursuant to the presidential power to quell domestic violence,
federal troops are expressly exempt from the prohibitions of
Posse Comitatus Act, and this exemption applies equally to
active-duty military and federalized National Guard troops.4

• Aerial photographic and visual search and surveillance by military
personnel were found not to violate the Posse Comitatus
Act.

• Congress created a “drug exception” to the Posse Comitatus Act.
Under recent legislation, the Congress authorized the Secretary
of Defense to make available any military equipment and personnel
necessary for operation of said equipment for law
______________
2 The language of the Posse Comitatus Act was further amended by congressional
action reflected in P.L. 103-322 (1994).

3 For further details, the reader is directed to: Lujan (1997); Department of the Army
(undated); and to the notes of various court decisions refining the interpretation of the
Posse Comitatus Act. For the latter, see United States Code, Title 18, Crimes and
Criminal Procedures, Sections 1361 to 1950 2000 Cumulative Annual Pocket Part, St.
Paul, Minn.: West Group, 2000, pp. 13–17.

410 U.S. Code Sections 331 through 334 provide guidance. Section 332 states: “Whenever
the President considers the unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages,
or rebellion against the United States, makes it impracticable to enforce the laws of the
United States in any state or territory by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings,
he may call into federal service such of the militia of any state, and use such of the
armed forces to suppress the rebellion” (Lujan, 1997).
Overview of the Posse Comitatus Act 245
enforcement purposes. Thus, the Army can provide equipment,
training, and expert military advice to civilian law enforcement
agencies as part of the total effort in the “war on drugs.”

• Use of a member of the Judge Advocate Corps as a special assistant
prosecutor, while retaining his dual role in participating in
the investigation, presentation to the grand jury, and prosecution,
did not violate Posse Comitatus Act.

• The Coast Guard is exempt from Posse Comitatus Act during
peacetime.

• Although brought under the Act through DoD regulation,
described above, the Navy may assist the Coast Guard in pursuit,
search, and seizure of vessels suspected of involvement in drug
trafficking
.
IMPLICATIONS FOR ARMY HOMELAND SECURITY
ACTIVITIES
There is a rather diverse range of potential activities engendered in
each of the homeland security task areas—domestic preparedness,
COG, border and coastal defense, and continuity of operations—that
may involve circumstances in which the Army is asked to assist
domestic law enforcement. Accordingly, it is critical that the Army
develop doctrine, leadership, and training programs that can provide
clear and specific guidance on when and how the Posse Comitatus
Act—as well as any other laws that proscribe Army activities in the
domestic arena—applies and when it does not.


http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_r...R1251.AppD.pdf

[Woodmonkey]

Originally Posted by DocDiggs

It isn't that simple. I've posted the act to which this "order" would have to
conform. The law was originally post-Civil War for very good reasons. It is the foundation law which is intended to prevent the deployment of regular military troops into the general population to act as police agents. An excellent law, I might add. The NG may be used as required, but only at the direction of a state's governor...NOT the president unless federalized. Nor can one state's NG cross their state's border into another state unless federalized by law. This then becomes questionable under the Posse Comitatus Act...federal troops acting as police within the US.

Even if the various state's NG troops are used within their own state, the problem arises that they are not regular, bull time, but rather "weekend" soldiers with regular day/night jobs. To federalize these people would create monumental problems as to their jobs, for their employers, families, pay and benefits, and so on.

I think you and I agree on this, Doc. I don't want the NG or active duty military used to guard our borders instead of beefing up the border patrol and turning them loose to do the job they are trained to do.

[USA11B]

I think a good start would be dealing effectively with illegals that caught or apprehended under current law. No point in making new laws to be flaunted or ignored. Increased manning of the Border Patrol could be helpful.
Even with The Posse Comitatus Act, I advocate a highly mobile armed force to combat the reported foray of armed Mexican troops onto American soil. Those making the incursion would be ordered to surrender post haste. Failure to do so would get you shot, without further negotiations.

[SherryGrace]

All other efforts (other than securing the borders) are useless...when a deported illegal can just come back over the border, the very next day.

FIRST secure the borders, THEN enforce existing laws.

And it may not be the most ideal situation...but using NG to secure the borders WHILE they beef up the Border Patrol...is okay with me.