CLYDE LEWIS
I have been seeing a lot of speculation in social media that showcase a number of theories about what is next for the United States as we are seeing more of a crackdown on social distancing and shelter in place. There are many that are worried that the next step is martial law and there are those, mostly who do not know how to spell the word martial telling people that we are already in a state of martial law.
As of Tuesday, more than 1,500 Guard personnel in 22 states were called up to aid efforts to stop the spread of COVID-19 as the World Health Organization declared the coronavirus a pandemic on March 11, with President Donald Trump following two days later to classify the virus as a national emergency.
In simple terms, martial law is the replacement of civil rule with temporary military authority in a time of crisis. While its imposition is rare, the United States does have several noteworthy instances where martial law came into play, including in times of war, natural disasters and civic disputes.
Though there is no precise definition of martial law, the precedent in the United States holds that under it, “certain civil liberties may be suspended, such as the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, freedom of association, freedom of movement, and the writ of habeas corpus – the right to a trial before imprisonment may be suspended.
Legally speaking, we are not under martial law but we seem to be implementing it in spirit, meaning that if local governments wish to impose many of the privileges they have without checks and balances you may see the rise of many state dictators who are using COVID-19 as an excuse to enact unconstitutional laws. (see the bottom of this article)
Martial law can be declared by both the president and Congress. The governor of a state may also declare martial law if it is included in that state’s constitution. However, Congress has never solely imposed it.
In extreme circumstances, there is an exception: the Insurrection Act, which allows the use of active-duty or National Guard troops for federal law enforcement in cases when “rebellion against the authority of the U.S. makes it impracticable to enforce the laws of the U.S. by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings,” according to U.S. Northern Command.
The president has named the coronavirus a “major disaster” under the Stafford Act, which enumerates how the federal government can handle emergency responses, which no president has ever done before in response to a health epidemic. While much of the coronavirus response falls under the purview of the federal government, “enforcing” laws relating to public health and safety falls squarely within the powers of the states under the Tenth Amendment.
For now, no major mobilizations have occurred, and the power to call up the National Guard remains with the states, including for drill weekends and other duties..
That can change of course, as we are in a partial martial law condition, things can certainly go south quickly.
President Trump now claims the power to quarantine individuals suspected of being infected by the virus and, “stop and seize any plane, train or automobile to stymie the spread of contagious disease.” He can even call out the military to cordon off a US city or state.
Now, as I had predicted there are local authoritarians that are taking advantage of their new powers.
The mayor of Champaign, Illinois, signed an executive order declaring the power to ban the sale of guns and alcohol and cut off gas, water, or electricity to any citizen. The governor of Ohio just essentially closed his entire state.
The Mayor of New Orleans signed a couple of emergency orders that can restrict the sale or transportation of alcohol and firearms.
The Second Amendment Foundation isn’t thrilled with state officials that are using a virus to specifically infringe the second amendment. The SAF penned a response to the mayor’s office, informing them that if they don’t fix that language in the new declaration then they’ll be taken to court:
“The presence of a nasty disease does not suspend any part of the Bill of Rights, no matter what some municipal, state or even federal politician may think.
While we certainly recognize the seriousness of this virus and its ability to spread rapidly, treating Covid-19 and taking steps to prevent it from infecting more people has nothing at all to do with the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment.”
Governments love crises because when the people are fearful they are more willing to give up freedoms for promises that the government will take care of them.
In the wake of the COVID 19 outbreak, it is impossible to know the attitudes of everyone in the chaos; however, the mainstream media has captured an overall attitude of dissonance that could echo for more than the initial 15 days of hell that the government has imposed on the entire country.
Are we now at a point in the United States where we don’t understand the implications of what martial law is or what Executive Orders and lists of American citizens marked for death means to the very liberty and well-being of the country?
I wonder if we have been desensitized to the idea that we would never implement an authoritarian rule that the fix is in.
Martial law is not simply an emergency declaration. It is the suspension of civil rights and assumption of all authority by the police or military, which in a democracy are supposed to be under civilian control.
The measure is so extreme that, on the national level, it has been imposed exactly once by Abraham Lincoln. Despite the obvious calamity posed by the Civil War, Lincoln’s imposition of martial law and suspension of habeas corpus remains controversial to this day.
The head of the Atlantic Council wrote an editorial this week urging NATO to pass an Article 5 declaration of war against the COVID-19 virus. This would be unnecessary but of course, we see that there are some that are not satisfied until there are tanks in streets flexing their muscles against a tiny virus.
President Donald Trump announced in a March 18 White House briefing that he was invoking the Defense Production Act (DPA) to expand the supply of resources available to deal with the COVID-19 outbreak.
The DPA allows the president to direct the production of private sector firms of critical manufactured goods to meet urgent national security needs.
Trump’s move seeks to marshal additional resources for America’s emergency response to COVID-19. This will hopefully increase the production of masks, ventilators, and respirators, as well as expand hospital capacity to combat the outbreak.
No comments:
Post a Comment