For those of us "old" timers from CU & the Cave, the DUmp often speculated that the previous Fascist Hitler President George W. Bush would declare martial law. It was always amusing fodder for us at the time considering leftists hyperventilate at every utterance or fear. Wish I could access the CU archives for how many times the DUmmies called it "Marshall", not martial. It became a long-running joke.
Anyway...
Upon hearing the news about South Korea's President briefly declaring "Martial Law" earlier today, was eagerly awaiting a media outlet to again postulate it could happen here. Well gosh darn it, the Washington Compost did not fail. Password protected so no link, but here are the pertinent portions:
The 5 Minute Fix: Could Martial Law happen in the U.S.?
By Amber Phillips
South Korea’s president briefly declared martial law Tuesday, suspending civil rights, barricading the parliament with troops and putting media outlets under government control. Lawmakers quickly moved to override the order, and South Korea’s president said he would lift his declaration.
Could such a constitutional crisis happen here in the United States? President-elect Donald Trump has shown some clear authoritarian tendencies. In his first term, he raised the idea of using martial law to stay in power after he lost reelection; he sent in the National Guard to disperse racial-justice protesters; and on one of his last days in office, he refused for hours to call off his supporters as they attacked the Capitol.
In his second term, he has said, he would be a dictator, but only on “Day One” — to “close the border” and “to drill, drill, drill.” And he’s suggested he would use the military on the “enemy from within.”
OK toots, those were sarcastic jokes you dense clown.
Amber Phillips
By Amber Phillips
South Korea’s president briefly declared martial law Tuesday, suspending civil rights, barricading the parliament with troops and putting media outlets under government control. Lawmakers quickly moved to override the order, and South Korea’s president said he would lift his declaration.
Could such a constitutional crisis happen here in the United States? President-elect Donald Trump has shown some clear authoritarian tendencies. In his first term, he raised the idea of using martial law to stay in power after he lost reelection; he sent in the National Guard to disperse racial-justice protesters; and on one of his last days in office, he refused for hours to call off his supporters as they attacked the Capitol.
In his second term, he has said, he would be a dictator, but only on “Day One” — to “close the border” and “to drill, drill, drill.” And he’s suggested he would use the military on the “enemy from within.”
While Trump regularly railed against the media and some political opponents during his first term, he did not officially suspend civil liberties, like South Korea’s president did Tuesday. And while Trump’s allies have drafted plans to employ the military in his second presidency to tamp down protests, the president-elect’s spokesman has said that Trump “has always stood for law and order, and protecting the Constitution.”
There are some parallels — and some differences — between what’s happened in South Korea and what could happen here, according to constitutional experts. Here’s what to know about martial law in the United States.
Suspending habeas corpus: This would radically reduce everyday legal protections. Habeas corpus is the constitutional right to question one’s detainment. Without it, the state doesn’t have to justify an arrest.
The Constitution says habeas corpus should be suspended only “when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.” South Korea’s president justified martial law by declaring the opposition party a threat, leveraging the dangers posed by North Korea. Here in the United States, after 9/11, prisoners held at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, had their habeas corpus rights suspended.
Congress is supposed to have a say in this, but President Abraham Lincoln did it during the Civil War on his own authority, Bateman said.
Invoking the Insurrection Act: This law allows a president to call in troops for domestic law enforcement — a role the military is typically barred from playing — in an emergency.
Trump’s allies have begun planning for how he could invoke the Insurrection Act on his first day in office to tamp down on any protests against his presidency, The Washington Post has reported.
Call in the National Guard to clear the streets: State and local officials are supposed to request National Guard help first, but in 2020, Trump sent the National Guard into D.C. to clear racial-justice protesters off the streets, against the wishes of the mayor.
All of these are centuries-old laws or constitutional protections that many experts say are in major need of overhauls. Restrictions on their use are just vague enough for a motivated president to get around.
“A president probably couldn’t suspend habeas corpus on his own,” Bateman said. “But would the courts stop him?”
I can't stop laughing at how insipid these ass-clowns write such blather.
