Donald Trump has confirmed, once again, his intention to use the US armed forces to implement a mass deportation plan, a commitment from his election campaign. However, this decision could directly conflict with American law and traditions that severely limit the involvement of troops in law enforcement in the country, writes Business Insider.
As the Trump administration prepares for inauguration, the question is not whether the president-elect will use the military, but how he will manage to overcome the legal roadblock imposed by the Posse Comitatus law, which prohibits the use of federal troops for law enforcement actions on American soil. In this context, Trump could try to mobilize the National Guard or find ways to circumvent existing laws. But this could lead to a significant political and legal crisis.
“If Trump uses the Insurrection Act of 1807 to take on the Posse Comitatus, it would be an extreme act, but not impossible,” said Mark Nevitt, a legal expert and former adviser to the US Navy. Either way, this decision would be a rare precedent, with the potential to provoke a strong reaction from governors, military officials and, of course, public opinion.
In a recent interview, the spokeswoman for Trump’s transition team, Karoline Leavitt, emphasized that the incoming administration will make every effort to implement the largest deportation operation in US history. “The American people have re-elected President Trump to deliver on his promises. It will marshal every federal and state power necessary to secure this plan,” Leavitt said.
However, the Posse Comitatus law does not completely prohibit the use of the National Guard for domestic law enforcement, as long as it remains under the control of state governors and is not federalized. It’s also not out of the question that Trump could work with friendlier governors to implement the plan on their turf, but that approach could fuel already existing political divisions between Republican- and Democratic-led states.
The Legal and Moral Challenges of Military Involvement in Immigration
Former Navy lawyer Gary Solis explained that if Trump ordered the mobilization of troops, each branch of the military would review its legality. Two scenarios are possible: The military’s legal advisers could conclude that the order is legal, paving the way for a series of lawsuits to stop it, or, conversely, they would reject the order, leaving local commanders to refuse to- apply it.
Moreover, the same authorities may find that existing laws do not explicitly prohibit the use of the National Guard for domestic law enforcement purposes. However, in this case, some governors may refuse to cooperate, creating a crisis of major proportions.
“If President Trump tries to use that authority in red states like Texas or Wyoming and sends troops into blue states like California, where the governors don’t agree, there could be a major conflict. In such a situation, that state could claim that this is a violation of its sovereignty,” Nevitt warned.
Force mission? The army is not the police
In addition to the legal challenges, there is also a significant psychological and cultural aspect: US troops are not trained to act as domestic police forces. Historically, the military has been trained for external conflicts and to protect national security, not to enforce domestic laws. Thus, if Trump asks the military to get involved in immigration missions, he will have to face a strong backlash from them.
“The military has always been seen as a protector of the country, not as a tool to implement domestic laws. If the military had to enforce immigration laws, there would be a major breakdown in the public’s trust in the military,” Nevitt said.
In this context, Trump could face resistance not only from state and federal authorities, but also from members of the military who are ultimately supposed to enforce immigration laws. For them, fighting on the battlefield may be a clear mission, but intervening in domestic politics could generate a distortion of their role in front of citizens.
Alternative ways to implement deportations
Former “border czar” Thomas Homan suggested the military could help through “force multipliers” by carrying out logistical tasks such as transporting migrants or building detention infrastructure. However, any plan would require massive investment in detention centers and transportation resources. “The Department of Defense can assist with airlifts, but military personnel will be used for non-law enforcement duties,” Homan said.
In the face of such a plan, however, it remains to be seen whether Americans will accept the idea of the military involved in domestic law enforcement, and whether this will have long-term consequences on the public perception of the military and on President Trump’s political future, BI notes.
Source: ziare.com
