home

Rumsfeld and the Posse Comitatus Act

William Arkin writes in the Washington Post that the Armed Services Committee may be using Donald Rumsfeld to spur the end of the Posse Comitatus Act - under the cover of Hurricane Katrina. This would make it easier for Bush to impose martial law.

First off, Arkin says, it's based upon a faulty premise.

Nothing in law prevents the President from employing the military in a Katrina-like emergency if state and local government really breaks down. In fact, the 130-year-old Posse Comitatus Act more symbolizes the military's subordination to civil authority than it actually restricts what the military can do.

The Posse Comitatus Act (18 USC 1385) provides that “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 [Latin for "power of the county"] or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined … or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.” The PCA generally prohibits federal military personnel from interdicting vehicles, vessels and aircraft; conducting surveillance, searches, pursuit and seizures; or making arrests on behalf of civilian law enforcement authorities. The PCA applies to all of the federal uniformed services by statute or DOD policy. It does not apply to the U.S. Coast Guard.

After some more history of the Act, Arkin continues:

The problem here is that Donald Rumsfeld and his ever growing Industry of Military Complexes devoted to homeland security and counter-terrorism seem to be intentionally bad mouthing Posse Comitatus and connecting it to Katrina in order to earn themselves greater operational flexibility in the United States.

How so?

Even before Katrina, contingency planners at the U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM), the military's new homeland security command in Colorado Springs, were given marching orders by Rumsfeld to plan for the worst possible contingency domestically. The resulting plan, currently in draft and called CONPLAN 2002 (watch this space), is predicated on a scenario in which the Defense Department would have to take "the lead" from the Department of Homeland Security, civil agencies, and the States, that is, to act without civil authority.

I think we call that martial law.

< Newsweek Catches Congressman Ney in Lie | Another Scopes Trial >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Rumsfeld and the Posse Comitatus Act (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Oddly enough, I posted something similar but with more links about an hour before this was posted. Another slight difference: I mention Hillary and Joe Biden.

    Re: Rumsfeld and the Posse Comitatus Act (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Explain to me again which side of the political spectrum pissed and moaned about how Bush didn't get troops there fast enough - and then, when the answer given was that Blanco didn't agree to them right off, the same side pissed and moaned about how "it just should have gotten done" Well, careful what you wish for. Don't go acting all surprised by this impulse - you people asked for it.

    Re: Rumsfeld and the Posse Comitatus Act (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    He DIDN'T just deploy the military -- He EMPLOYED deputized MERCENARIES, in a US state. That's an impeachable act, and a federal crime. What Bush didn't deploy were sufficient RESCUE WORKERS or sufficient materiel to save people's lives. As for 'deploying troops,' James, FORTY PERCENT of the Louisiana Naitonal Guard and EIGHTY PERCENT of their emergency equipment is over in Iraq, building out Bush's wet dream.

    Re: Rumsfeld and the Posse Comitatus Act (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    I saw somewhere a snippet from LA's law allowing security guards to enter disaster areas. Is there some federal law preventing blackwater from entering NOLA? If so, please post it.

    Re: Rumsfeld and the Posse Comitatus Act (none / 0) (#5)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Well, careful what you wish for. Don't go acting all surprised by this impulse - you people asked for it.
    I think the military doing search and rescue is acceptable and preferable to the military doing law enforcement. Big difference there, so try not to confuse the two.

    Re: Rumsfeld and the Posse Comitatus Act (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    I agree with Ernesto. Also if the National Guard is good enough to aid in occupation, then they are more then ready to perform police actions.

    Re: Rumsfeld and the Posse Comitatus Act (none / 0) (#7)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    PIL writes:
    He EMPLOYED deputized MERCENARIES, in a US state. That's an impeachable act, and a federal crime.
    The security guards you are referring to were mosly employed by privtae industry and individuals seeking to prevent their property from being stolen.
    As for 'deploying troops,' James, FORTY PERCENT of the Louisiana Naitonal Guard and EIGHTY PERCENT of their emergency equipment is over in Iraq, building out Bush's wet dream.
    Your numbers aren't correct, but, so what? Do you think we shouldn't pursue National Policy because we may need NG at home?

    Re: Rumsfeld and the Posse Comitatus Act (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    PPJ, I've seen those numbers widely reported.

    Re: Rumsfeld and the Posse Comitatus Act (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    You lie, Jim, and BMB is also a liar. These are not 'security guards.' These are DEPUTIZED MERCENARIES. Security guards do not have police powers. They cannot arrest, they can only detain. Mercenaries cannot be deployed in US states by the Federal government, even with the acceptance of the state government. THEY HAVE NO LEGAL ROLE IN OUR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT. They are NOT police -- they are hired KILLERS. What is the legal recourse of someone under the US or Louisiana constitution for injury or wrongful death by deputized mercenaries? This action suspends the constitution of both state and republic. Indeed, it is such a serious crime against us that it doesn't surprise me a bit that Jim and BMB join in the treason.

    Re: Rumsfeld and the Posse Comitatus Act (none / 0) (#10)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    Security guards do not have police powers. They cannot arrest, they can only detain.
    Hmmm, Can't speak for Loosianna, but in California all you need to be to make an arrest is a person, and witness a crime. PC 837.

    Re: Rumsfeld and the Posse Comitatus Act (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    The citizen's power to arrest is what is actually a power to detain while awaiting a police authority who can actually arrest, Patrick. Mercenaries are hired killers. They are CRIMINALS. I'm glad to see how much you lot support paid murderers.

    Re: Rumsfeld and the Posse Comitatus Act (none / 0) (#12)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    Paul in Yahoo land,
    837. A private person may arrest another: 1. For a public offense committed or attempted in his presence. 2. When the person arrested has committed a felony, although not in his presence. 3. When a felony has been in fact committed, and he has reasonable cause for believing the person arrested to have committed it.
    I don't read that as a private person may "detain." Do you? I know, I know. It's a nuance, I wouldn't expect a layperson to get it. Point of fact, a private person may also use reasonable force to make an arrest. Would you like that PC section as well? How about the definition of an arrest?

    Re: Rumsfeld and the Posse Comitatus Act (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    Of course it is to detain. Or do you really think that the private person can imprison the person they have 'arrested' in their own private jail? Deputizing mercenaries is a way of putting ILLEGAL and IMMORAL power over the heads of citizens. It's an impeachable offense.

    Re: Rumsfeld and the Posse Comitatus Act (none / 0) (#14)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    There you have it folks, he's such a contraian that even when it's in his face in black and white he can't admit he's wrong. Oh well. Into the pile of unteachables goes paul.

    Re: Rumsfeld and the Posse Comitatus Act (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    No, into your misunderstanding of simple distinctions goes your brains. Tell you what: go ahead and try to arrest someone some time for the reasons in that statute. See what happens. Keep a lawyer handy. Only duly sworn police officers can arrest. You can detain, pending the arrival of those officers. It is NOTHING like arrest what you are doing, except that the person might not be able to walk away while you are holding them. If the police later let them go without charges, you pal may well be the one going to court.

    Re: Rumsfeld and the Posse Comitatus Act (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    The point of course is the deputizing of MERCENARIES. I didn't sign off on giving up our rights to be free from criminals being AUTHORIZED to kill our family members if they see fit, or to threaten reporters and residents with ILLEGAL firearms. Point a gun at someone and order them to do it. Now expect to spend some time in jail. The same goes for mercenaries. If Blackwater deploys to LA after the earthquake, open season on mercs.