Trump has expanded military uses on the southern border. Are there any legal restrictions? : NPR

A Stryker lined up on April 3 near the fence on the border with southern Mexico on April 3. David Swanson/AFP via Getty Images Closed subtitles

Switch title
David Swanson/AFP via Getty Images

The nearly 150-year-old law has attracted people's attention as President Trump expands the use of the military in immigration enforcement.

The POSSE COMITATUS Act is intended to limit the use of federal forces in law enforcement activities on U.S. soil. The rule has its exceptions and loopholes, but Trump's second term and his crackdown on immigration are shaping it as a major test of the law.

Today, thousands of active-duty military units are deployed to the U.S.-Mexico border. What the army is allowed to do there has also changed dramatically - beyond the typical role of supporting the Border Patrol.

The most important development came last month, when Trump called 170 miles of federal land along the southern border (spanning California, Arizona and New Mexico) military devices or defense zones.

On Thursday, the Department of Defense announced that the second part of Texas will be marked as a military device.

As a result, at least 82 people were charged by the federal government for "unauthorized entry".

This is something to know.

What are the restrictions of the POSSE COMITATUS Act?

Federal laws were enacted in 1878 after the Civil War, when former allies were either unwilling or unable to enforce civil law. In response, the federal government stepped in and deployed active forces to maintain order. This has led to potential military over-consolations.

The law after the Civil War was one of the founding principals rooted in the country, a refusal to military involvement in civil affairs. Ideals are a key complaint in the Declaration of Independence, which was later reflected in the federal provisions and in the Bill of Rights.

In fact, the law prohibits federal armed forces from participating in civilian law enforcement, such as searches, seizures and arrests on U.S. streets unless “expressed by the Constitution or Congress Act.”

This restriction applies to the military, naval, marine, air force and space forces. The Coast Guard, on the other hand, is exempt. The National Guard usually operates under state authorities, and so does it. However, when the guard units were called to federal services, they were bound to the POSSE COMITATUS Act.

In some cases, the National Guard has served the federal interest under state orders. For example, in 2020, 11 states sent National Guard to Washington, D.C. to help respond to protests over George Floyd’s murder.

What about the new defense zone?

The National Guard and Federal Army have been deployed to the United States-Mexico border under the previous administration, often providing support to the Border Patrol, such as providing equipment, logistics and surveillance.

Now, federal military personnel will be allowed to temporarily detain and search for people believed to have invaded the newly established defense zone on the southern border, effectively bypassing the POSSE COMITATUS Act.

“By doing this, he kind of gives the military a lot of participation in immigration law enforcement tasks the way they used to do,” said Mark Nevitt, a professor at Emory University’s Law School.

Nevet added that the president usually requires Congressional approval to designate a military zone. But Trump was able to evade this demand, as he declared a national emergency on the southern border on his first day of office, thus authorizing military construction projects. Just safe.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth addressed Fort Bliss, Texas and the Joint Task Force on the Southern Border to discuss their efforts to establish the New Mexico Defense Zone on April 25. Army PFC. Sean Hodge/U.S. Department of Defense Closed subtitles

Switch title
Army PFC. Sean Hodge/U.S. Department of Defense

Dan Maurer, a retired colonel of the Army Jag, also fears the lack of people who allow the army to use how many troops to violate the new military devices. In the White House NSPM-4 memorandum on the new name, it stated that the armed forces will "comply with the rules of the use of force."

exist lawMaurer wrote that while these rules are often consistent with domestic law enforcement standards and constitutions, they also allow deadly force to protect sensitive property. Trump's framework is a framework where the border faces "invasion" and "attacked", and the situation is even more complicated.

"As a result, the ambiguity of law enforcement and military operations may lead to ambiguity about the role they are in, thus truly empowering, legal and reasonable power," Moller told NPR.

Nevitt is concerned that the line between military and law enforcement roles could also undermine military preparations and hurt military recruitment and retention.

“Most people join the military to fight and defend the country, defend their national security interests, deploy overseas,” he said. “It’s not to be a domestic law enforcement officer.”

The complete exception that Trump has not used yet

On May 1, 1992, a U.S. Marine Corps (right) advanced at the U.S. Marine Corps Air Station in Tustin, California. Paul is at the start/AP Closed subtitles

Switch title
Paul is at the start/AP

Key exceptions to POSSE COMITATUS ACT It is the Uprising Act, which gives the president the power to summon troops to curb unrest or rebellion in an emergency

The Insurgency Act has been used about 30 times in American history, mainly to calm civil unrest. The last cited in 1992, when President George HW Bush sent troops and Marines to Los Angeles to help quell violence after the police who defeated Rodney King were acquitted. It has never been used for immigration enforcement.

According to Maurer, the Insurgency Act may be more worrying than the Insurgency Act that Trump invoked Venezuelan immigration to detain and deport Venezuelan immigrants.

Last week, a federal judge in Texas ruled that the president's use of the Alien Enemy Act was "illegal." Meanwhile, in 1827, the Supreme Court determined that the President had the sole power to invoke the Uprising Act.

"But with the Uprising Law, we already have case law that says the court can't really guess the decision," he said.