Re: Obama Administration Says President Can Use Lethal Force Against Americans on US
Do the posters who are arguing for the Administration's assertion understand that using the military domestically is expressly outlawed in the United States?
The Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act forbid the President the power to use the military except in instances of martial law. The Bush Administration successfully amended the Insurrection Act as a part of the 2006 Defense Authorization Bill (a political paradox, because to vote against this meant you "didn't support the troops in Iraq"), however, a year later those changes were repealed. The arguments made by senators at the time were to the effect that the President should not have sole discretion to declare martial law. It is dangerous, and places an extreme amount of trust into the hands of just one man.
The present Administration is aware of the long legal debate over Presidency authority and the parameters in which any administration can use military force domestically. Since the massacre at Waco, the executive and legislative branches have jostled for power over how much force is due and how that force can be applied. However, it has always been a legislative argument, with Congress enacting laws either for or against; even if the Constitutional ramifications have yet to be tested in modern times (however, there is a strong basis to suggest that no administration could have the powers suggested by either Bush or Obama, those powers rest with the States).
Point being, we have a series of laws in this country which address this very specific issue and address it without any room for interpretation. The Bush administration attempted to add vague parameters in 2006, giving them a potential legal argument for the use of military force domestically. The temporarily succeeded, but those changes were, again, repealed in 2008. Now, the President is asserting that he indeed has the authority the Congress has expressly stated he doesn't have. He is saying, clearly and succinctly, that he is above the law.
And not to make this political, because again I am a liberal progressive, but I find Barack Obama's hypocrisy astounding. While a senator, Obama voted against the amendment which authorized the President to use military force domestically - an amendment to the Insurrection Act of 1806 but hidden inside the 2006 Defense Appropriations bill. Now as President, he has not only continued Bush's encroachment, but in fact he has quietly accelerated it.
The 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, which we discussed on this board, expands Presidential authority to unprecedented levels allowing him to detain anyone, but specifically United States citizens - Americans - without trial. The President alone can determine that the nation is in a state of hostilities, and we are presently "at war" with terrorism, a war that may never end. And until this war is over, the President can declare that any person engaged in hostilities against the United States or conspiring against the United States or lending aid to those conspiring against the United States, can be held indefinitely, without trial, until the end of hostilities is declared.
This is absolutely outrageous, and while I almost totally disagree with Rand Paul's ideologies, I applaud and commend him for making the issue known to the public. People have become so docile, and so complacent as to accept the reversal of roles between the People and the Government. We now live in a society in which the rights of the People extend from the power of the Government, rather than the Government's authority to rule being granted by the renewing will of the People. The social contract we have maintained for 200+ years is gradually deteriorating with every adult American who abdicates his responsibility as an informed citizen, who performs his civic duty in keeping his government accountable and holding lawmakers responsible.
Even if you disagree with my points, think about what I'm saying logically and rationally. Step back for a second and just think about what's going on. This is an encroachment.
