I hope it is never again necessary for the President of the United States to order the US Armed Forces to quell a domestic disturbance. State and local authorities have the primary responsibility in the US to maintain law and order and to protect the lives and property of our citizens. If, for any reason, they are unable or unwilling to fulfill those responsibilities, the President of the US has the authority to use federal armed forces if he deems it necessary, with or without the agreement of the state or local authorities.. This fact might be a shocking surprise to some Americans. Many would cite the Posse Comitatus Act prohibiting the use of federal armed forces to perform civil police functions within the US. If the President invokes the Insurrection Act of 1807, it supersedes the Posse Comitatus Act. Let’s remind ourselves of several instances when it has been invoked.
Most recently, the Insurrection Act was invoked by President George H. W. Bush in 1992 to quell the Rodney King riots in Los Angeles. President Kennedy invoked the Act in 1962 and again in 1963 to send federal armed forces into Mississippi and Alabama to support the enforcement of federal laws. In 1957, President Eisenhower invoked the Insurrection Act to send troops from the 101st Airborne Division to Little Rock, Arkansas, over the objection of the state governor, to escort nine black students into Little Rock High School. President Johnson invoked the Act in 1967 and again in 1968 when he sent troops from the 82nd and 101st Airborne Divisions into Chicago and Detroit to quell civil disturbances and restore law and order. There were also instances in the 19th Century when Presidents invoked the Act, most notably when President Lincoln invoked it to authorize the use of federal troops to fight in the Civil War.
As you can see from these examples from our history, the scope and severity of the civil disturbance or insurrection was not the determining factor in whether or not a President invoked the Act.
The current sections of US law that embody the provisions of the Insurrection Act of 1807, as amended, are Title 10, Sections 251 through 255.
§251. Federal aid for State governments
Whenever there is an insurrection in any State against its government, the President may, upon the request of its legislature or of its governor if the legislature cannot be convened, call into Federal service such of the militia of the other States, in the number requested by that State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to suppress the insurrection.
§252. Use of militia and armed forces to enforce Federal authority
Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.
§253. Interference with State and Federal law
The President, by using the militia or the armed forces, or both, or by any other means, shall take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if it-
(1) so hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States within the State, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or
(2) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.
In any situation covered by clause (1), the State shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.
§254. Proclamation to disperse
Whenever the President considers it necessary to use the militia or the armed forces under this chapter, he shall, by proclamation, immediately order the insurgents to disperse and retire peaceably to their abodes within a limited time.
§255. Guam and Virgin Islands included as “State”
For purposes of this chapter, the term “State” includes Guam and the Virgin Islands.
Today, in several major cities in America we are confronted with civil disturbances characterized by riots, arson, looting, destruction and defacing private and public property, and assaults on law enforcement officers and private citizens. These are not the peaceful protests guaranteed by the First Amendment to the US Constitution. I applaud the actions being taken by the Trump Administration to send federal law enforcement officers to help local authorities wherever they are needed. I also applaud the restraint showed by President Trump in not yet invoking the Insurrection Act to send elements of the US Army to quell the civil disturbances, especially in places like Portland, Oregon. Let’s hope local civil authorities support their police and step up efforts to fulfill their responsibilities to restore and maintain law and order. Let’s also hope President Trump can succeed in helping restore law and order by using federal law enforcement officers instead of the armed forces. Let’s not forget, however, that the authority exists to use the federal armed forces, with or without the agreement of the local authorities.
President Trump is responding to the current civil disturbances around the country in a very measured and responsible manner. These are the marks of a great leader in difficult circumstances. We need more of his leadership.
Vote to re-elect President Trump for four more years!
One reply on “When Can the US Army be Called to Suppress Domestic Violence?”
This is very good. Would that the major media did the same kind of reporting on this and other topics. This should get the widest dissemination because very few people know or understand all this. I knew some of it, but even though I am old enough to remember every one of the 20th century examples cited, I didn’t know the full extent of the President’s authority, probably because I never thought about it; and I had forgotten that Eisenhower used his authority despite the governors’ opposition.