What do you think of the recent POTUS decision to activate National Guard units for border duty in the south-west?

2018-04-07T18:29:48-04:00

Under law he would have to federalize the troops. Can the state governors refuse to provide the troops?

Response by PVT Mark Brown made Apr 7 at 2018 7:19 PM

2018-04-07T19:19:55-04:00

I do know that at this point Oregon Governor Kate Brown has made it clear that she will not participate in this program. She has made the announcement that Oregon National Guard personnel will not be sent to our southern border. Having said all that, I really do not understand where the line is drawn between state control and federal control in the use of NG troops. One statement I read recently seems to support Gov. Brown of Oregon, it states: "The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 forbids U.S. troops from being deployed on American soil for law enforcement. The one exception is provided by the Insurrection Act of 1807, which lets the president use the military only for the purpose of putting down rebellions or enforcing constitutional rights if state authorities fail to do so." This came from here: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2007/01/12/governors-lose-in-power-struggle-over-national-guard/ It would appear the tenth amendment to the US Constitution would protect the Oregon decision. I do not think guarding the border between the US and Mexico rises to the level described in The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. I did not find anything countermanding that act.

Governors lose in power struggle over National Guard

From Stateline.org: A little-noticed change in federal law packs an important change in who is in charge the next time a state is devastated by a disaster such as Hurricane Katrina. To the dismay o…

Response by MSG Lance Kelly made Apr 7 at 2018 7:35 PM

2018-04-07T19:35:29-04:00

I think it would depend on whether he can actually call them up. Doing a little research I read from an article titled, "Why President Trump Can't Directly Order National Guard Troops To U.S.-Mexico Border". It said that the details matter because the president can't just call up military forces on a whim to do domestic law enforcement. It's barred by a federal law dating back to the period after the Civil War, a law known as posse comitatus. I read where the Oregon Governor said she would refuse the order. I also read that it becomes a Title 32 verse Title 10 matter. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Response by SGM Bill Frazer made Apr 7 at 2018 7:49 PM

2018-04-07T19:49:04-04:00

Imagine they think they can- and legally they could be right, but as Governor, would you want your NG units to be a the bottom of the Federal Budget bucket for the next 3 yrs?

Response by CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 8 at 2018 12:44 AM

2018-04-08T00:44:37-04:00

Good question. I suppose the current POTUS thinks he can by following his two predecessors. But when you’re discussing State versus Federal on the States National Guard personnel this would be very interesting because of the Posse Comitatus law.

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Apr 8 at 2018 1:20 AM

2018-04-08T01:20:39-04:00

POTUS doesn't call up the Guard, Governors do, except in case of "National Emergency", which this isn't. What we have here is a mission statement by POTUS and request for Governors to chip in. DoD is picking up the tab. That's why you see Texas and Arizona stepping up and Cali and Oregon not interested. Interesting thing is the call up by LBJ on the school segregation mess was likely illegal as no way the Governor would go for it. The more recent ones by Obama and Bush were for humanitarian or support without arrest authority. Again, mission, money, and a request to Governors.

Response by PO1 Brian Austin made Apr 8 at 2018 3:31 AM

2018-04-08T03:31:31-04:00

It would probably be an observation and support role, like the previous call ups by Bush and Obama. Free up more Border Patrol agents to patrol the border.