Mis-Using the Military
Terry H. Schwadron
Nov. 22, 2024
Donald Trump emphatically trumpeted on a 4 a.m. social media post this week that he’s confirming and doubling down on the idea of using the military in the promised roundup of migrants in the country illegally. “TRUE!!!.” he posted of reports about using the military on American streets.
His plan is to declare a “national emergency” to justify a first-of-its-kind of deployment towards the arrest, containment and deportation first of those found to have ignored court orders or found guilty of a crime, and then up to 11, 15 or 20 million others “in the country illegally.”
Even as his immigration czar Tom Homan says that details are still being assembled about the who’s and how’s of capture and removal, it is obvious that there will be plenty of argument about exactly how all this is carried out. But the clear message from Dear Leader is that he expects the deportations to be so encompassing as to require committing the otherwise barred U.S. military to the hunt-and-grab effort.
Trump says he will use the 1798 law to repel those taking part in sedition and invasion to justify his use of military troops and untold cost in the effort. Trump, of course, has described migrants as criminals and drug smugglers who are “poisoning the blood of America.” His campaign was built on anti-immigrant resentment.
There is not a lot of room for subtlety or scalpel-like view of law in what apparently is under discussion, though no one has seen the practical details.
Busting the Norms
Everything about 47 focuses on norm-busting, of course. Congressional advice and consent, legislative restrictions and constitutional language all are viewed as mere obstacle to be bulldozed aside. In Trump’s name, Homan has insisted that cities and states that attempt to halt the deportation steamroller will pay a price.
Stephen Miller, deputy White House chief of staff designate and immigration policy whisperer, has simply asserted that budgets will be remade, and that the Department of Defense will be made to absorb the cost of building “vast holding facilities that would function as staging centers” and private prison beds as captured migrants await flights to other countries. Staff from other federal agencies will be reassigned to help Homeland Security run these facilities.
But the idea at the heart of the deportation plans is that the military somehow will be involved — whether through deployment of active units or the nationalizing of state National Guard units. It is the singular imagery of armed U.S. military units on patrol on American streets to hunt and capture those either in violation of court order or perhaps their families, or even to be used in workplace raids, that are chilling.
We haven’t gotten that far in the public descriptions of how it all will work, but the specter of Army rifles on U.S. streets has a wide array of rights groups, congressional opponents, and the military itself on high alert. It could well be that the help from military is in construction activities or transportation, but it also could mean bolstering the ranks of ICE officers with National Guardsmen and federal troops activated to enforce the law on domestic soil under the Insurrection Act from 1807 that allows an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act that generally makes it a crime to use regular federal troops for domestic policing purposes.
You can see why this will end up in court quickly.
Where’s the Military Perspective?
Beyond the legal justifications, however, what will be the unintended consequences for committing a military that trains to kill efficiently on American homes and workplaces?
It is estimated that one in 20 families in this country have an undocumented individual as a relative. It is not inconceivable that there will be errors in identification or complications in an individual act of resistance. What are the rules of engagement for a military that has resisted for 250 years to fire on its own citizens — or residents?
What of the estimated 45,000 immigrants actively serving in the U.S. military, which requires them to be permanent legal residents and can offer a path to citizenship. Around 5,000 permanent residents enlist each year. Are we ready to order them to detain and deport relatives?
Is anyone concerned about the military brass who will face court martial for failing to obey a Trump order to deploy troops against American sites? Is there an argument that loyalist generals and admirals who survive will make the military less able, less lethal, less feared among the world’s armies? Is there anyone wondering whether the world’s troublemakers might try to take advantage of a U.S. military that is spending its time hunting migrants rather than on patrol in dangerous overseas assignments?
Just for nothing, many of these same arguments can be used about state and local police forces, whose need for information about crime requires contacts within the migrant communities and who see participation in migrant hunts as taking away from street safety.
The bravado of the incoming Team Trump so far is not acknowledging that using the military represents anything more than a legal speed bump. That’s a problem.
##