c/news · by Redditsux@lemmy.world · 1y

About 700 Marines being mobilized in response to LA protests, sources tell CNN | CNN Politics

https://www.cnn.com/2025/06/09/politics/marines-mobilized-los-angeles-protests

87 points · 10 comments · view on lemmy.world

10 Comments

HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works · 46 pts · 1y (8 replies)

I thought I read somewhere that using federal military forces against Americans was illegal?

Carmakazi@lemmy.world · 32 pts · 1y

Posse Comitatus Act, yes.

The fascism is continuing to escalate.

jordanlund@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 1y (6 replies)

Posse Comitatus:

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/posse-comitatus-act-explained

What does the Posse Comitatus Act say?

The Posse Comitatus Act consists of just one sentence: “Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”

In practice, this means that members of the military who are subject to the law may not participate in civilian law enforcement unless doing so is expressly authorized by a statute or the Constitution.

HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works · 12 pts · 1y (3 replies)

Found another possibility ...

Mr Trump could take a more far-reaching step by invoking the Insurrection Act of 1792, which would allow troops to directly participate in civilian law enforcement, for which there is little recent precedent.

Casting protests as an “insurrection” that requires the deployment of troops against US citizens would be riskier legal territory, one legal expert said, in part because mostly peaceful protests and minor incidents are not the sort of thing that the Insurrection Act were designed to address.

https://www.straitstimes.com/world/united-states/does-us-law-allow-trump-to-send-troops-to-quell-protests

oberstenzian@mastodon.social · 10 pts · 1y (2 replies)

@HellsBelle @jordanlund This is the only real thing he could attempt to use as flimsy legal justification.

The big questions are: is he TACO or Junior Mussolini? And how will the public at large respond to the Trump regime declaring the protestors are involved in a rebellion against the US? 🤷🏾‍♂️

jordanlund@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 1y

Yup, just waiting to see what he does. If he invokes the insurrection act and suspends posse comitatus, then we'll be invoking an open civil war.

Maeve@kbin.earth · 4 pts · 1y

Let's be real. We know what this weak, weak person and his sycophants will do. The bigger question is what will the citizens do?

TheMightyCat@lemm.ee · 3 pts · 1y (1 reply)

Army or Air Force

So is there a case that marines don't count then?

jordanlund@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1y

That's a good question, the Marines are Navy adjacent, so I'm not sure how that works.

It's weird that the act was updated to include the Air Force though since it was written in 1878.

The Air Force wasn't officially founded until 1947. The Marines have been around since 1775.

Reverendender@sh.itjust.works · 15 pts · 1y

The President deploying Marines inside the U.S. without invoking the Insurrection Act, declaring an emergency, or getting local/state approval — especially just to respond to peaceful protests — is unlawful on multiple levels:

🔹 Violates DoD Directive 3025.18 – Active-duty military (including Marines) can’t engage in domestic law enforcement unless explicitly authorized.
🔹 Violates the First Amendment – Peaceful protest is protected. Military suppression = unconstitutional. (NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886).
🔹 Violates the Fourth Amendment – Military detentions/searches are illegal without cause. (Indianapolis v. Edmond, 531 U.S. 32).
🔹 Ignores Posse Comitatus limits – PCA (18 U.S.C. § 1385) applies to Army/Air Force, but DoD extends it to all branches.
🔹 Unlawful military orders – Troops must disobey unconstitutional orders (UCMJ Art. 92; U.S. v. Calley, 48 C.M.R. 19).
🔹 Impeachable abuse of power – Violates Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution.

This isn’t just controversial — it’s flat-out illegal.