3 ms·
It's a good thing they don't have to bother upholding those other pesky enumerated rights too. The salient detail would be a strong distinction of soldiers fro
by mcint 2y ago
It's a good thing they don't have to bother upholding those other pesky enumerated rights too.
The salient detail would be a strong distinction of soldiers from police forces. It's only because of the strongly kept distinction that it's notable when federal military personnel are deployed in response to riots, natural disasters, or other national emergencies.
See also the related, but opposite in participant and realm of action, Posse Comitatus Act,
> signed on June 18, 1878 ... limits the powers of the federal government in the use of federal military personnel to enforce domestic policies within the United States.
> updated it in 1956, 1981 and 2021.
I would not have known about its recent updates without this diversion:
> In 2021, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 further expanded the scope of the Act to cover the United States Navy, Marine Corps, and Space Force
But not the Army nor Air National Guards of states, nor the Coast Guard, since law enforcement is part of its mission.
https://en-wp.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act https://en-wp.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act
The distinction has its own wikipedia page discussing the long history of its relevance, at least 146 years.
https://en-wp.org/wiki/Separation_of_military_and_police_roles https://en-wp.org/wiki/Separation_of_military_and_police_rol...
- mindslight 2y agoThe Posse Comitatus Act is roughly a century after the Revolution. Being an easier-amendable congressional law means the wording can be much more precise, calling out each branch of military specifically. And yet even still, some of those branches have domestic law enforcement duties. The third amendment was a reaction to the large amount of British troops being embedded throughout society, with those troops performing domestic law enforcement duties. So I'd say that regardless of the split that developed later, domestic law enforcement falls wholly within the 1700's meaning of soldiers. It's not like the founders were against externally-facing standing armies but just peachy keen on internally-facing standing armies.