Posted on 07/22/2002 12:14:32 PM PDT by kattracks
(CNSNews.com) - Any changes to the 124-year-old law that prevents the U.S. military from exercising police powers is a "terrible idea," according to a policy expert from a Washington think tank. Gene Healy from the Cato Institute was reacting to the comments made Sunday by Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph Biden (D-Del.)
During an appearance on Fox News Sunday, Biden said the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which prevents the military from arresting civilians, should be re-examined and "has to be amended" in light of the dangers of terrorism that exist today.
Last year, following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the Pentagon and New York City's World Trade Center, Sen. John Warner (R-Va.), the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee expressed similar concerns.
In a letter to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Warner asked whether the 1878 law should be repealed. "Our way of life has forever changed," Warner wrote.
"Limited use [of military forces] beyond that permitted by existing law might strengthen the nation's ability both to protect against and to respond to events of the sort which we have recently undergone," Warner's letter stated.
But Healy, an attorney and policy analyst with Cato, thinks having the military performing civilian law enforcement duties would be a "disaster."
"I think it's a terrible idea. Soldiers are trained to shoot to kill. Civilian police officers, ideally are trained to use force as a last resort," said Healy.
"One of the reasons we have this (Posse Comitatus) restriction in the law is to avoid the collateral damage and military style rules of engagement that can come into play when you get the army involved in tasks it's not trained for. I think it would be a real disaster if they went down this road of normalizing military involvement in law enforcement," Healy said.
Michael Scardaville, a homeland security analyst with the Heritage Foundation, thinks law enforcement should be left to civilians in almost all cases.
"In an extreme situation, I could understand where something like that would be warranted," Scardaville said. "However, the primary role of the military in homeland security should be one of supporting the civilian agencies that are going to be responsible for our preventive measures. But they (the military) should not be our lead element.
"There could be a legitimate role for them to participate in law enforcement roles," said Scardaville, but such decisions should be left up to the president, governors and other top officials.
Biden said he was "not talking about general police power -- changing the idea that you would have your local National Guard with arrest power like your local policeman."
But, Biden added that, "it's not very realistic" under current law, for soldiers with knowledge of weapons of mass destruction who might be checking out the discovery of a terrorist weapon in America, to "not be able to exercise the same power a police officer would in dealing in that situation."
"Right now, when you call in the military, the military would not be able to shoot to kill, if they were approaching the weapon," said Biden.
After the Civil War ended in 1865, Congress assigned to federal troops a huge law enforcement role in the Confederate states. The Union troops guarded election polling places, arrested members of the Ku Klux Klan, stopped illegal moonshine production and held down any worker unrest.
The Posse Comitatus Act was enacted in1878 to eliminate military enforcement of civilian law. Many historians think the act effectively ended civil war reconstruction of the South.
No prosecutions have ever taken place under the law, and exceptions have occasionally been allowed, such as the deployment of troops to end rioting in Chicago in 1919 and to control the protests of angry World War I veterans in Washington, D.C. in 1932.
Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge said Sunday on CNN that using the military for law enforcement hasn't even been discussed within the administration.
"There's been absolutely no discussion with regard to giving military authorities the ability to arrest in their support of civilian authorities," said Ridge. Asked whether he believes the military should have the power to arrest Americans, Ridge said, "no."
Ridge's office did not return phone calls Monday seeking further comment.
E-mail a news tip to Jim Burns.
Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.
Over 50% of our citizens voted for Al Gore.
If that doesn't qualify them as enemies, what DOES? :o)
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
Geez, we had a revolution becuase of this stuff once already. Don't people learn their lessons?
Strictly speaking that's not true; neither Bush nor Gore got 50% of the vote. However, Gore and Nader combined got over 50%, which is probably even more disturbing.
Good point.
So, with that in mind...would someone please explain how "citizen" and "enemy" are mutually exclusive?
Personally, I like to know what I am jerking my knee about.
And offense work in Iraq!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.