Why Were Out-of-State National Guard Units in Washington, D.C.? The Justice Department’s Troubling Explanation

[DOTR]

So the law is what is wrong schlomoe?

"I’ve emphasized the critical text. Whereas § 502(f) is principally about training, it appears to authorize use of state National Guard troops, in their Title 32 status, for any “operations or missions undertaken ... at the request of the President or Secretary of Defense.” This provision was added to § 502 in the Fiscal Year 2007 National Defense Authorization Act, the legislative history of which is somewhat less than clear as to its purpose and scope. And the regulations promulgated under § 502(f)(1) do not appear to provide any further illumination. (The Army’s 2018 Domestic Operational Law Handbook is a bit more insightful, but not as to using § 502(f) like this.) The two things that are clear, in context, are that (1) the provision is voluntary (leaving it up to individual governors whether to provide the requested support); and (2) any National Guard troops so activated would be in Title 32 status—meaning that they would remain under the command and control of the state, not the federal government."

I was going to ask if you typically comment on things you know nothing about but that appears to be self-evident.

DC has no governor schlomoe. Its directly governed by the Federal government.

 

[DOTR]

"Over the previous week, thousands of National Guard troops from states across the country arrived in Washington, D.C., as part of the Trump administration’s response to the largely peaceful protests taking place across the city. After a great deal of controversy—including an argument over and whether troops were allegedly kicked out of their hotels by D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser—they have now departed back to their home states. But under what legal authority were they deployed to D.C. in the first place? The answer was not obvious, and the administration initially remained silent as to its reasoning. Now, in a letter to D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, Attorney General William Barr has cleared up that mystery, explaining that the out-of-state National Guard troops were there under the authority of 32 U.S.C. § 502(f).
In solving one mystery, however, Barr unearthed several more. One of two things is true: Either § 502(f) does not authorize the use of out-of-state National Guard troops in the manner in which they were deployed in Washington last week, or it does—and is therefore a stunningly broad authorization for the president to use the military at any time and for any reason, including as a backdoor around the Posse Comitatus Act. Simply put, either Barr is wrong, or he’s right—in which case Congress should immediately close the loophole he’s identified (and, apparently, seized upon)."

Why Were Out-of-State National Guard Units in Washington, D.C.? The Justice Department’s Troubling Explanation

Either the Justice Department’s legal reasoning is wrong, or it’s right—in which case Congress should close the loophole immediately.

www.lawfareblog.com

...................................................................................................................................
Anyone expecting this admin to act in a way to limit the "stunningly broad authorization for the president to use the military at any time and for any reason" just isn't paying attention.

Here schlomoe..try this.

10 U.S. Code § 12406 - National Guard in Federal service: call

• U.S. Code
• Notes

prev | next
Whenever—
(1)
the United States, or any of the Commonwealths or possessions, is invaded or is in danger of invasion by a foreign nation;
(2)
there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States; or
(3)
the President is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States;
the President may call into Federal service members and units of the National Guard of any State in such numbers as he considers necessary to repel the invasion, suppress the rebellion, or execute those laws. Orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States or, in the case of the District of Columbia, through the commanding general of the National Guard of the District of Columbia.

 

[ColtMadeMenEqual]

D.C. is a unique case as it is not considered a State.

Your point being.............................?

The point , you tard, is there no Washington DC National Guard, and there is no Governor, so the President has authority over the use of NG inside of DC , and obviously must use NG from actual states when he does so.

 

[progressive hunter]

so youre going to dbl down on being an ignorant twit,,,,

I get the distinct feeling you are either too lazy to read the article or too stupid to comprehend its meaning.

at least I know what is a state and what isnt,,,

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The president overrides the mayor of DC on these matters, is my understanding. Correct that it is federal property.

The prez has authority over the Guard from DC, but not necessarily NG troops being brought in from out of state. The vagueness of the law is what the article addresses.

DC isn't a state so there is no state national guard to use. Out of state isn't even an appropriate or correct termm

 

[Unkotare]

"Over the previous week, thousands of National Guard troops from states across the country arrived in Washington, D.C., as part of the Trump administration’s response to the largely peaceful protests taking place across the city. After a great deal of controversy—including an argument over and whether troops were allegedly kicked out of their hotels by D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser—they have now departed back to their home states. But under what legal authority were they deployed to D.C. in the first place? The answer was not obvious, and the administration initially remained silent as to its reasoning. Now, in a letter to D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, Attorney General William Barr has cleared up that mystery, explaining that the out-of-state National Guard troops were there under the authority of 32 U.S.C. § 502(f).
In solving one mystery, however, Barr unearthed several more. One of two things is true: Either § 502(f) does not authorize the use of out-of-state National Guard troops in the manner in which they were deployed in Washington last week, or it does—and is therefore a stunningly broad authorization for the president to use the military at any time and for any reason, including as a backdoor around the Posse Comitatus Act. Simply put, either Barr is wrong, or he’s right—in which case Congress should immediately close the loophole he’s identified (and, apparently, seized upon)."

Why Were Out-of-State National Guard Units in Washington, D.C.? The Justice Department’s Troubling Explanation

Either the Justice Department’s legal reasoning is wrong, or it’s right—in which case Congress should close the loophole immediately.

www.lawfareblog.com

...................................................................................................................................
Anyone expecting this admin to act in a way to limit the "stunningly broad authorization for the president to use the military at any time and for any reason" just isn't paying attention.

You know D.C. isn't a state, right?

 

[DJT for Life]

"Over the previous week, thousands of National Guard troops from states across the country arrived in Washington, D.C., as part of the Trump administration’s response to the largely peaceful protests taking place across the city. After a great deal of controversy—including an argument over and whether troops were allegedly kicked out of their hotels by D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser—they have now departed back to their home states. But under what legal authority were they deployed to D.C. in the first place? The answer was not obvious, and the administration initially remained silent as to its reasoning. Now, in a letter to D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, Attorney General William Barr has cleared up that mystery, explaining that the out-of-state National Guard troops were there under the authority of 32 U.S.C. § 502(f).
In solving one mystery, however, Barr unearthed several more. One of two things is true: Either § 502(f) does not authorize the use of out-of-state National Guard troops in the manner in which they were deployed in Washington last week, or it does—and is therefore a stunningly broad authorization for the president to use the military at any time and for any reason, including as a backdoor around the Posse Comitatus Act. Simply put, either Barr is wrong, or he’s right—in which case Congress should immediately close the loophole he’s identified (and, apparently, seized upon)."

Why Were Out-of-State National Guard Units in Washington, D.C.? The Justice Department’s Troubling Explanation

Either the Justice Department’s legal reasoning is wrong, or it’s right—in which case Congress should close the loophole immediately.

www.lawfareblog.com

...................................................................................................................................
Anyone expecting this admin to act in a way to limit the "stunningly broad authorization for the president to use the military at any time and for any reason" just isn't paying attention.

DC isnt a state you ignorant twit,,,

So? DC being a federal territory in no way changes the law with respect to how out of state Guard units are deployed, who has authority over them, and who has the authority to have them deployed to any federal territory or state.

First, The DC Guard is the only Guard in the Country that is Federal. They are not State-Controlled.

To answer your other nonsense. All Guard Units report to the Secretary of the Army, who reports to the Defense Secretary
who reports to the Commander-in-Chief. That is the President of the United States.

If/When the DC Guard cannot handle whatever situation is confronting them, the President will ask the Major General
Commanding the DC Guard how many men does he need to handle whatever crisis they are facing.

When the Prez gets a number he gives it to the Secretary of Defense, along with the timeline of when he wants the troops
in DC. The Sec of Defense then deploys Guard units from whatever States can supply the troops. Once they are
selected tyhey are "federalized" to put them under the command of the President and to remove command from the Governor
of whatever State they are coming from. (A Governor cannot order his Guard back to their State on his own, he must wait
until they are released back to the state.)

 

[mudwhistle]

"Over the previous week, thousands of National Guard troops from states across the country arrived in Washington, D.C., as part of the Trump administration’s response to the largely peaceful protests taking place across the city. After a great deal of controversy—including an argument over and whether troops were allegedly kicked out of their hotels by D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser—they have now departed back to their home states. But under what legal authority were they deployed to D.C. in the first place? The answer was not obvious, and the administration initially remained silent as to its reasoning. Now, in a letter to D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, Attorney General William Barr has cleared up that mystery, explaining that the out-of-state National Guard troops were there under the authority of 32 U.S.C. § 502(f).
In solving one mystery, however, Barr unearthed several more. One of two things is true: Either § 502(f) does not authorize the use of out-of-state National Guard troops in the manner in which they were deployed in Washington last week, or it does—and is therefore a stunningly broad authorization for the president to use the military at any time and for any reason, including as a backdoor around the Posse Comitatus Act. Simply put, either Barr is wrong, or he’s right—in which case Congress should immediately close the loophole he’s identified (and, apparently, seized upon)."

Why Were Out-of-State National Guard Units in Washington, D.C.? The Justice Department’s Troubling Explanation

Either the Justice Department’s legal reasoning is wrong, or it’s right—in which case Congress should close the loophole immediately.

www.lawfareblog.com

...................................................................................................................................
Anyone expecting this admin to act in a way to limit the "stunningly broad authorization for the president to use the military at any time and for any reason" just isn't paying attention.

Mostly peaceful....in other words....violent rioters using human-shields.