EO to use the military alongside law enforcement
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/04/strengthening-and-unleashing-americas-law-enforcement-to-pursue-criminals-and-protect-innocent-citizens/Open linkView original on lemmy.world265
Comments40
I barely hear a very soft voice echoing away into silence:
".... the military is prohibited to operate on US soil in acts of enforcing law against its citizens ..."
And now we'll find out where the military stands. This is a tipping point.
They fired all the top generals, pretty much, so we will indeed see if our soldiers read and took to heart the oath they swore. They are legally obligated, under the UCMJ, to refuse unlawful orders and fortunately the UCMJ is quite explicit in which orders are to be determined unlawful.
Our military actually operates on a bottom-up model, so firing top generals doesn’t really do much.
That's concerning, because I've found they are less likely to fight against this; many of them are Maga white supremacists who take out their anger that should be against the very government that left them broken, but they lash out against immigrants, lgbtq, woand women. I've dealt with the rank-and-file military over the years, that's how I know. I have little to no respect for the institution now, much less its members. I wanted to join the service but bullshit like this kept me back, and this was pre-Trump.
"There's a reason you separate military and the police. One fights the enemies of the state. The other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people."
Godsdammit so say we all.
this, combined with what pam bomb-me said the other day, would mean that the military could be quartered in your home on suspicion that you are harboring enemies of the established government. that government is also now bypassing representation by taxing the public via tarriffs.
the words evade me. do they need fucking trefoil hats and bright red coats, too?
edit - they're literally making you pay a tax you didn't ask for on british tea. i mean, come on
I support you. Chronically internet driven people like person replying to you generally don’t talk to veterans, don’t understand the military, and don’t really care about you.
Clock's ticking. Shit or get off the pot, Mr. or Mrs. Talk.
Until then, you go in the same group.
that it's fine to kill civs in other brown countries but not your own?
fuck your oath.
You sure you're a veteran? You immediately cut and run at the first sign of trouble?
Those colors are super runny, I guess. Must be watercolors.
Sorry I offended you.
Anyone who confronts you is a troll?
Cognitive dissonance sure is comforting.
2020 was the first time in decades that the majority of active duty military voted blue.
None. They are fucking eunuchs or worse still they totally favor all of this.
There it is.
Unrelated side note: Is anyone else watching Andor?
If we could stop accelerating into full-blown fascism, that would be great. Stay safe out there.
Holy fuck
That can't be good.
So much for the Posse Comitatus Act
A whole lot of oath keepers forgetting what they swore to it seems.
Pretty rich coming from a convicted FELON and adjudicated RAPIST who ILLEGALLY attempted to overturn an election.
If you don't own a firearm, now is the time.
Buy guns. Help others buy guns. Train. Help others train.
As bad as this is, it isn't actually saying anything about using the military alongside law enforcement, though it does talk about giving law enforcement excess military assets and training and likely opens the door to using personnel as well (section 4-b), though they could just interpret "assets" to include forces... Anyway, either way this is bad
ETA: actually, the more I read it and think about it, especially in context of what the administration has been up to lately, they're almost certainly going to try to use it to deploy military forces for civilian policing
assets do include personnel
It says ..., and personnel... towards the end of subsection b. So, unless I'm misreading it, it's already in there.
... Where 'crime' is defined as 'whatever the fuck the Trump admin decides is a crime, or whoever the fuck they decide is a criminal.'
This is about as direct as possible as it is to say 'the military will be engaging in domestic policing operations at scale and in depth.'
As other commenters have pointed out... 'national security assets' means... personnel of all kinds, guns, ammo, tanks, helicopters, jet aircraft... logistics systems, military bases, naval vessels...
It is literally anything under the control of or used by the military, its the catch all term for 'everything, including the kitchen sink'.
This is like... hrm ok, we're gonna have a striker brigade company do security/presence patrols through Pittsburgh like it's Mosul or Baghdad, we're gonna have global hawks assisting chasing down suspects, we're gonna have some of the old barracks at the old training grounds retrofitted into detention centers, or maybe we'll just use engineering companies to set up some new concentration camps...
Yeah, all of that kind of shit is now on the table, being considered.
If an actual, 'classical' civil war of military vs military is gonna start, this would be how.
It also seems to put local law enforcement in a position to be accused of interfering with federal policy if they don't comply.
Totally unrelated, my conservative state's corrupt AG is suing my city for their alleged "sanctuary city policy" and the case goes before a judge tomorrow.
They're going to try to occupy Illinois under martial law, something crime or immigration state of emergency. My guess is the Indiana national guard will be called in.
And then maybe we get to see how a 'the orders from the governor and the president directly collide and contradict' situation plays out.
Posting this here because it seems relevant:
Panel discussion on what is an illegal order:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsrwIJcxYWY
Sooo....the SS...
I know you guys hate AI but here are two points and some valid analysis:
Quote:
Analysis: This gives the federal government, specifically the Attorney General, the power to override or end local agreements and court orders designed to reform police practices, even if those were democratically enacted or judicially mandated at the local level. This centralizes authority and reduces the autonomy of local governments to oversee their own police forces.
Quote:
Analysis: This provision prioritizes protecting law enforcement officers from legal and financial consequences, which, if not carefully limited, could shield officers from accountability for misconduct. It may discourage thorough investigation and prosecution of police wrongdoing, thereby weakening mechanisms that ensure police are subject to the law like any other citizen.
Yes, I, too, can read the statements the AI read. Importantly, it missed that cops get free legal counsel as well as everything else.
So... martial law then?
Yes.
I will reiterate that in the last few months the online things I watch have had a massive uptick in military recruitment ads. I have had this in comments here and there and I would get a few. Well they were behind and just catching up but common. The timing. You know what the best recruiting tool is. Not having any viable options for work.
What exactly are "excess military and national security assets"?