Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
101 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Time to deploy the US Army to Texas? (Original Post) The Contrarian Jan 2024 OP
Republicans are trying to use this issue to paint Biden soft on border enforcement bucolic_frolic Jan 2024 #1
Agreed. The posse comitatus act seems relevant to this. Redleg Jan 2024 #3
You are correct. The Posse Comitatus Act applies. TomSlick Jan 2024 #31
-Texas keeps talking about leaving the union lapfog_1 Jan 2024 #5
Deleted not worth the effort MagickMuffin Jan 2024 #20
Post removed Post removed Jan 2024 #27
Which other states are refusing to obey a court order? shrike3 Jan 2024 #36
biggest taker... lapfog_1 Jan 2024 #59
Link, please? Your repeated comments about California do not match any niyad Jan 2024 #62
Calexit and partition LeftInTX Jan 2024 #70
I should have made clear that I was talking about the taxes. niyad Jan 2024 #71
Stop all federal funding for Texas. Problem solved! Emile Jan 2024 #2
Except for the poor folks in Texas who need some of the federal dollars Redleg Jan 2024 #4
We could cut federal funding... Think. Again. Jan 2024 #28
TX sends more dollars to the federal government than it recieves. former9thward Jan 2024 #10
Well good then, they can use their own money Emile Jan 2024 #12
This message was self-deleted by its author mahatmakanejeeves Jan 2024 #16
That's just the point. The Contrarian Jan 2024 #22
Right now they are using federal money. Emile Jan 2024 #24
Texas IS using its own money TexasDem69 Jan 2024 #30
So you're cool with what Abbott's doing? Just curious. shrike3 Jan 2024 #37
That's a completely different question TexasDem69 Jan 2024 #38
Then answer it, kemosabe (You can use an old reference, so can I.) shrike3 Jan 2024 #41
Stating the facts TexasDem69 Jan 2024 #45
I personally would have shown a little more opprobrium regarding Abbott, but that's me. shrike3 Jan 2024 #56
I'm not smart enough to solve the border/immigration issue TexasDem69 Jan 2024 #60
That's been my take for years. shrike3 Jan 2024 #64
I hope Texas goes blue in 2024 TexasDem69 Jan 2024 #66
Hope springs eternal. shrike3 Jan 2024 #68
As long as they are receiving federal money they're not. Emile Jan 2024 #53
That covers only grants. Anything else? NT mahatmakanejeeves Jan 2024 #13
Do you have alternative information? former9thward Jan 2024 #15
I'm on a phone now, and it's hard to look things up. mahatmakanejeeves Jan 2024 #17
Actually in June of 2019 Progressive dog Jan 2024 #39
I'm willing to guess that Texas provides a lot more than just taxpayer money to the Federal government. Igel Jan 2024 #48
Oh yeah Texas is gwenerous Progressive dog Jan 2024 #95
Are you saying SS is a gift to the states? former9thward Jan 2024 #61
Obviously federal taxes pay for social security Progressive dog Jan 2024 #88
My taxes pay for SS. former9thward Jan 2024 #89
Taxes are paid to the Federal governent and Progressive dog Jan 2024 #96
You don't know what they include. former9thward Jan 2024 #97
It is like balance of payments between nations Progressive dog Jan 2024 #98
That figure is only for grants moniss Jan 2024 #81
If someone has the "correct" figure I wish they would post it. former9thward Jan 2024 #83
There are some moniss Jan 2024 #87
15 military bases does wonders for the economy there. limbicnuminousity Jan 2024 #90
And it does wonders for our military. former9thward Jan 2024 #91
And the idiots that want to secede TxGuitar Jan 2024 #94
This is America pwb Jan 2024 #6
Biden should call up the Texas National Guard. Presidential call ups trump Gubernatorial call ups. Kennah Jan 2024 #7
This message was self-deleted by its author marble falls Jan 2024 #8
Isn't it illegal to deploy active US military on US soil? The Posse Comitatus Act? brush Jan 2024 #9
Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne to Little Rock CanonRay Jan 2024 #14
The President would have to invoke the Insurrection Act first. DetroitLegalBeagle Jan 2024 #29
It's an election year too. Looks like Eisenhower did this in 1957 after he was term limited. LeftInTX Jan 2024 #74
Who has ultimate authority ovewr the Guard? edhopper Jan 2024 #11
Sure. limbicnuminousity Jan 2024 #18
Greg, why are you letting all these undocumented immigrants in. Trump said his wall is completed. keithbvadu2 Jan 2024 #19
This message was self-deleted by its author B.See Jan 2024 #73
what biden needs to do moonshinegnomie Jan 2024 #21
You can't "court martial" civilian officials. brooklynite Jan 2024 #25
federalize the texas nat guard moonshinegnomie Jan 2024 #26
Without invoking the Insurrection act DetroitLegalBeagle Jan 2024 #33
Still can't court martial the police TexasDem69 Jan 2024 #34
That will lose him political support Calculating Jan 2024 #92
The POSSE COMITATUS ACT prohibits the military from being used to implement domestic policy. brooklynite Jan 2024 #23
So how did Eisenhower do it in 1957? Polybius Jan 2024 #76
The National Guard is not the army. brooklynite Jan 2024 #78
A poster above said he sent in the army Polybius Jan 2024 #79
As an aside TexasDem69 Jan 2024 #32
Sounds like it's just a matter of some military re-shuffling... Think. Again. Jan 2024 #35
Is t the Texas national guard TexasDem69 Jan 2024 #40
Doesn't the word "National" mean anything? Think. Again. Jan 2024 #43
According to the internets TexasDem69 Jan 2024 #47
So there is no overiding central authority... Think. Again. Jan 2024 #50
No idea TexasDem69 Jan 2024 #51
National Guard can be federalized DetroitLegalBeagle Jan 2024 #52
A quick wikipedia search... Think. Again. Jan 2024 #55
Nothing in that article TexasDem69 Jan 2024 #57
Except the part that says exactly that... Think. Again. Jan 2024 #58
Administration TexasDem69 Jan 2024 #63
Um, yeah. Think. Again. Jan 2024 #65
Being correct TexasDem69 Jan 2024 #67
I appreciate... Think. Again. Jan 2024 #69
Something has to be done. shrike3 Jan 2024 #42
Send the Coast Guard or Navy orthoclad Jan 2024 #44
Will U.S. agents take the traitor governor into custody? Marthe48 Jan 2024 #46
WTF? TexasDem69 Jan 2024 #49
+1. Wouldn't want them campaigning against us calling Emile Jan 2024 #72
What do we do? Imagine trmp in the White House and a Dem Gov did this? spanone Jan 2024 #54
Not yet Polybius Jan 2024 #75
Time for Abbott to get George Wallace treatment. Sneederbunk Jan 2024 #77
The fundamental question is whether any state B.See Jan 2024 #80
The Romeikes are idiots for moving from a area51 Jan 2024 #82
That's exactly what Trump is proposing to do. Barry Markson Jan 2024 #84
Well what would you propose? The Contrarian Jan 2024 #85
18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection limbicnuminousity Jan 2024 #93
An idea almost as meritless as calling for Texas to secede. Torchlight Jan 2024 #86
That's not going to happen. Autumn Jan 2024 #99
The Courts will deal with it. WarGamer Jan 2024 #100
Terrible political move pinkstarburst Jan 2024 #101

bucolic_frolic

(43,465 posts)
1. Republicans are trying to use this issue to paint Biden soft on border enforcement
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 06:52 PM
Jan 2024

Sending in federal troops would play right into their hands.

Redleg

(5,861 posts)
3. Agreed. The posse comitatus act seems relevant to this.
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 06:54 PM
Jan 2024

I am not an attorney but it seems to me that sending soldiers down there will create more problems than it will solve.

TomSlick

(11,127 posts)
31. You are correct. The Posse Comitatus Act applies.
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 09:32 PM
Jan 2024

Absent a presidential invocation of the Insurrection Act, federal troops must not be used to enforce civilian law.

In 1857, President Eisenhower relied the Reconstruction era Enforcement Acts to protect the rights of African Americans that were being denied by Arkansas Governor Faubus' defiance of federal court orders. Those acts would appear to have no application in this instance.

My suggestion would be for the President to order the Texas National Guard Adjutant General to federal service and then order him to withdraw all National Guard troops from the area. If he refuses either order, send a contingent of military police officers to apprehend him for violation of the UCMJ.

lapfog_1

(29,243 posts)
5. -Texas keeps talking about leaving the union
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 07:00 PM
Jan 2024

let's expel them... and then they can do what they want with the border with Mexico. We will use our new majority in the House and Senate to finally build the wall that the cons want so bad, all the way around Texas. Probably should annex that panhandle thing just to make the wall less expensive. give it to Oklahoma.

Actually it wouldn't bother me for Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana to all leave the union.

well, sort of.

Response to lapfog_1 (Reply #5)

shrike3

(3,856 posts)
36. Which other states are refusing to obey a court order?
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 09:35 PM
Jan 2024

What other states are thumbing their nose at the Commander in Chief?

Last time I checked ...

lapfog_1

(29,243 posts)
59. biggest taker...
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 10:31 PM
Jan 2024

if you mean the feds contribute more to CA than to other states, that is true.

However, CA is by FAR the biggest contributor to the federal budget.

In terms of what states contribute more than they take, CA is in the top tier.

https://smartasset.com/data-studies/states-most-dependent-federal-government-2023

in fact CA in 2023 was ranked 41 out of 50, contributing $5.03 for every dollar the federal government spends in CA.

as for the number of nutjobs north of Redding, CA... compared to the coastal population... ahh no. They are only large in actual numbers, but in percentages... very few compared to the population of California.

LeftInTX

(25,743 posts)
70. Calexit and partition
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 10:53 PM
Jan 2024
https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/calexit-proposal-supporters-collect-signatures/


LOS ANGELES
'Calexit' Supporters Get The Green Light To Start Collecting Signatures
losangeles
April 24, 2018 / 6:11 PM PDT / KCAL News


SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- Advocates looking for California to secede from the United States can begin collecting signatures for a long-shot initiative asking voters to weigh in, Secretary of State Alex Padilla said Monday.

The proposed initiative is the third so-called Calexit proposal since President Donald Trump's election. Previous efforts were withdrawn or failed to gather the required signatures.

The latest would ask voters about secession in 2020. If it passed, a second election would be held a year later asking voters to affirm the decision.

Marcus Ruiz Evans, co-founder of the group Yes California, said the second vote would show that Californians are serious about secession and would strengthen the case for foreign governments to recognize the state's independence.

https://www.yescalifornia.org/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_and_secession_in_California

In early 2009, former State Assemblyman Bill Maze began lobbying to split thirteen coastal counties, which usually vote Democratic, into a separate state to be known as either "Coastal California" or "Western California". Maze's primary reason for wanting to split the state was because of how "conservatives don't have a voice" and how Los Angeles and San Francisco "control the state". The counties that would make up the new state would be Marin, Contra Costa, Alameda, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, San Benito, Monterey, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura, and Los Angeles Counties. It has also been proposed that the state be split in two simply at the straight divide of the 120th meridian west, much like its border with the state of Nevada.[18]


In June 2011, Republican Riverside County Supervisor Jeff Stone called for Riverside, Imperial, San Diego, Orange, San Bernardino, Kings, Kern, Fresno, Tulare, Inyo, Madera, Mariposa and Mono counties (see map, highlighted in red) to separate from California to form the new state of South California. Officials in Sacramento responded derisively, with governor Jerry Brown's spokesperson saying "A secessionist movement? What is this, 1860? It's a supremely ridiculous waste of everybody's time."[19] and fellow supervisor Bob Buster calling Stone "crazy", suggesting "Stone has gotten too much sun recently."[20]


In September 2013, county supervisors in both Siskiyou County and Modoc County voted to join a bid to separate and create a new "State of Jefferson".[13] Mark Baird, spokesperson for the Jefferson Declaration Committee, is reported to have said the group hopes to obtain commitments from as many as a dozen counties, after which they will ask the state legislature to permit formation of the new state based on Article 4, Section 3 of the US Constitution. In January 2014, supervisors in Glenn County voted in favor of separation,[21] and in April 2014, Yuba County supervisors voted to become the fourth California county to join the movement.[22]

On June 3, 2014, residents in Del Norte County voted against separation by 58 percent to 42 percent;[23] however, voters in Tehama County supported a separation initiative by 57 percent to 43 percent.[24] On July 22, 2014, Sutter County voted 5–0 to join the State of Jefferson.[25]

Six Californias: On December 19, 2013, venture capitalist Tim Draper submitted a six-page proposal[26][27] to the California Attorney General to split California into six new states, citing improved representation, governance, and competition between industries.[28]

On February 19, 2014, Secretary of State Debra Bowen approved the proposal allowing supporters to start collecting signatures in order to qualify the petition for a ballot. A total of 807,615 registered voters were needed by July 18, 2014, for the proposal to appear on the ballot.[29] On July 14, the petition organizer announced that the proposal received enough signatures to be placed on the ballot in two years;[30] however, it was determined that only about two thirds were valid and the petition fell short of qualifying for the November 2016 ballot.[31]

In August 2022, the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors began an approval process for a possible secession measure to be added to the November 2022 general election ballot. Proponents of including the ballot measure cite dissatisfaction in the county's share of state and federal funding.[40][needs update]

In 2020, "Move Oregon's Border For a Greater Idaho" proposed breaking off most of Oregon's area and some of Northern California and join it with Idaho. The areas proposed to break off of Oregon and California vote Republican but in a state whose legislatures are dominated by Democrats. Douglas and Josephine counties in Oregon approved language for petitions to put a measure on the ballot. Even if passed by voters, it would still need approval from all three state legislatures.[38][39]

niyad

(113,798 posts)
71. I should have made clear that I was talking about the taxes.
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 10:56 PM
Jan 2024

I am well aware of the calexit insanity.

Redleg

(5,861 posts)
4. Except for the poor folks in Texas who need some of the federal dollars
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 06:57 PM
Jan 2024

Maybe we should just let them secede from the union. Sarcasm alert.

former9thward

(32,128 posts)
10. TX sends more dollars to the federal government than it recieves.
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 07:39 PM
Jan 2024
They would be happy at your suggestion.

Texans sent the federal government $261 billion in taxes in 2016, and the state government received $39.5 billion in grants in return, or about 15 percent of the total federal tax tab.

https://comptroller.texas.gov/economy/fiscal-notes/2017/november/federal-funding.php#:~:text=Texans%20sent%20the%20federal%20government%20%24261%20billion%20in,15%20percent%20of%20our%20total%20federal%20tax%20tab.

Response to Emile (Reply #12)

 

The Contrarian

(87 posts)
22. That's just the point.
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 09:18 PM
Jan 2024

That is exactly what they are doing. And securing the border is a federal function not a state function.

shrike3

(3,856 posts)
41. Then answer it, kemosabe (You can use an old reference, so can I.)
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 09:46 PM
Jan 2024

It almost comes across like you're defending Abbott's actions. Though I'm sure that's not what you intend. If you're here, you're a Democrat, not an Abbott supporter.

Kind of a sarcastic question. Now here's a serious one. What do Texans think of this? I don't know anybody in Texas. Have no one on the ground to ask. His approval rating appears pretty stable, so his actions aren't costing him anything. Do Texans support what he's doing?

TexasDem69

(1,881 posts)
45. Stating the facts
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 09:57 PM
Jan 2024

Is a long ways away from defending Abbott’s actions. You’re too smart not to understand that. Just like DeSantis is popular in Florida, Abbott is popular in Texas. I’m pretty sure he’ll be reelected unless we can convince McConaughey to run.

The OP suggested sending the U.S. military to Texas to enforce domestic law. I do not support that step at all. It’s a slippery slope. Trump would not hesitate to take that step, and would point to Biden’s actions as justification.

shrike3

(3,856 posts)
56. I personally would have shown a little more opprobrium regarding Abbott, but that's me.
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 10:20 PM
Jan 2024

But maybe the support vibes I sensed from you were support for the state itself, which is understandable. It's your home. I'd appreciate you answering my second question. What do people in Texas think of his actions regarding the border? You don't know everyone in Texas, obviously, but you can read the temperature down there far better than I can. What do you see and hear from people? I'm not talking about polls; I'm talking about the mood. Are Abbott's actions popular?

I don't know what should be done re the current situation, but something's got to be done and soon. This can't continue.

TexasDem69

(1,881 posts)
60. I'm not smart enough to solve the border/immigration issue
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 10:31 PM
Jan 2024

My take is that no politician really wants to solve it, because we’ve been discussing the same problem since I started voting in the 80s.

I don’t talk politics with my fellow Texans because Texas is in fact conservative, so my liberal views aren’t particularly welcomed. But when politics do come up Abbott seems fairly popular. Democrats need a good candidate, or a famous one like McConaughey

shrike3

(3,856 posts)
64. That's been my take for years.
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 10:40 PM
Jan 2024

Pols don't have the will or the desire to tackle the border. Never have.

No offense, but I've been hearing that Texas is going to turn blue: never happens. Maybe a McConaughey could turn things around: I don't know. It's kind of like with DeSantis winning by a comfortable margin in 2022: I tell my Floridian friends, people voted for the guy, somebody has to like him.

Michigan has Dem leadership, but some of the most hardcore MAGAs I know are in Michigan. Girl I went to school with was down in Detroit, yelling "Stop the Count!" Meanwhile, the president of my graduating class (I grew up in Michigan) thinks abortion shouldn't be allowed for any reason, and the solution to gun violence is to get rid of gun-free zones and arm everyone in sight. So, a state may be ostensibly blue but have a lot of "red" people in it. I'm sure it's the same in a red state.

TexasDem69

(1,881 posts)
66. I hope Texas goes blue in 2024
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 10:43 PM
Jan 2024

But I’ve been reading stories about Texas going blue, or my home state North Carolina doing the same, for 30 years and other than President Obama (for NC) it’s never happened. It won’t happen in 2024 either. We’ll see about the future.

shrike3

(3,856 posts)
68. Hope springs eternal.
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 10:48 PM
Jan 2024

Only been to Texas once, and very briefly. Acquaintance was down there recently with her wife and thought Texans were the greatest; so friendly. On the other side of the coin, a relative of mine recently moved out of Texas after 20 years there. Just said, "It was time." Could be for political reasons, or not. Her family's pretty MAGA, so that may be why she's not talking.

mahatmakanejeeves

(57,725 posts)
17. I'm on a phone now, and it's hard to look things up.
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 08:01 PM
Jan 2024

Does this help?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/07/07/states-federal-benefits/

It looks as if Texans sent in $10,443 per capita and received $11,981 per capita.

And good evening.

Progressive dog

(6,931 posts)
39. Actually in June of 2019
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 09:41 PM
Jan 2024

"Business Insider" reported that Texas received $1280 dollars in spending per person in excess of Federal taxes. The Federal Government not only gives grants to stares. Social security, medicare, medicaid, defense spending and that money is mostly spent in states.
https://www.businessinsider.com/federal-taxes-federal-services-difference-by-state-2019-1?op=1

Igel

(35,386 posts)
48. I'm willing to guess that Texas provides a lot more than just taxpayer money to the Federal government.
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 10:02 PM
Jan 2024

Ports, leasing monies, other types of revenue.

Progressive dog

(6,931 posts)
95. Oh yeah Texas is gwenerous
Sat Jan 27, 2024, 05:39 PM
Jan 2024

Last edited Sat Jan 27, 2024, 07:05 PM - Edit history (1)

They even help guard the border. (sarcasm)

former9thward

(32,128 posts)
61. Are you saying SS is a gift to the states?
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 10:33 PM
Jan 2024

People paid into that program. As well as Medicare. It is not some gift. Defense spending to pay salaries is now a gift to the states? Wow...

Progressive dog

(6,931 posts)
88. Obviously federal taxes pay for social security
Wed Jan 24, 2024, 09:04 PM
Jan 2024

and some states get more payments than others. Grants are not gifts either. The federal government takes money form taxpayers in all states but spends more in some states than others.
You don't think Texas itself is sending money to the government, do you?
Texas gets more back in federal taxes than it pays which makes the OP wrong. Only 11 states pay more than thgey get back and Texas is in the other 39.

former9thward

(32,128 posts)
89. My taxes pay for SS.
Wed Jan 24, 2024, 10:14 PM
Jan 2024

Not "federal" taxes. And yours's too if you work. All of these charts never spells out how they are defining what state's get back. I don't wonder why.

Progressive dog

(6,931 posts)
96. Taxes are paid to the Federal governent and
Sat Jan 27, 2024, 05:43 PM
Jan 2024

are listed as revenue in it's budget. The charts count all the federal money returned to the states.directly or by spending. You get to tax no one.

former9thward

(32,128 posts)
97. You don't know what they include.
Sat Jan 27, 2024, 05:49 PM
Jan 2024

They don't say. Much of the info would be impossible to get on a state level anyway. It is BS and no one calls them on it.

Progressive dog

(6,931 posts)
98. It is like balance of payments between nations
Sat Jan 27, 2024, 06:55 PM
Jan 2024

So, yes I do know what they include. They include all taxes out and all federal money in. Couldn't be simpler.
A lot of federal tax money is immediately rerouted back to the states in the form of grants, which the state uses to spend on resources. But in some states, some taxpayers are left spending more in taxes than what they receive back in federal services.
The majority of states receive more in federal services than what they pay in federal taxes, but 11 states, including California and New Jersey, spend more than they receive.
https://www.businessinsider.com/federal-taxes-federal-services-difference-by-state-2019-1?op=1

moniss

(4,274 posts)
81. That figure is only for grants
Wed Jan 24, 2024, 01:37 AM
Jan 2024

and does not cover all federal dollars returning to and spent in Texas.

former9thward

(32,128 posts)
83. If someone has the "correct" figure I wish they would post it.
Wed Jan 24, 2024, 10:04 AM
Jan 2024

So far no one has. I am sure someone will post something showing TX is on welfare from the federal government.

moniss

(4,274 posts)
87. There are some
Wed Jan 24, 2024, 02:25 PM
Jan 2024

tax advocacy/social issues advocacy sites I've seen in the past that give the figures state by state.

former9thward

(32,128 posts)
91. And it does wonders for our military.
Wed Jan 24, 2024, 10:24 PM
Jan 2024

I trained at two of them in that state. Bases are put disproportionality in southern states so that our military is not shut down for large times of the year by the weather. They are never going to relocate to the north.

TxGuitar

(4,216 posts)
94. And the idiots that want to secede
Thu Jan 25, 2024, 10:30 AM
Jan 2024

Don't realize that those bases would be gone and the revenue (and hardware) with it. Texas would be a third world country that Mexico would probably just annex.

Response to The Contrarian (Original post)

LeftInTX

(25,743 posts)
74. It's an election year too. Looks like Eisenhower did this in 1957 after he was term limited.
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 11:04 PM
Jan 2024

Border Patrol should just remove the wire. Border Patrol is also armed. Heck, Border Patrol can then become "martyrs" if the Texas NG attacks them.

limbicnuminousity

(1,407 posts)
18. Sure.
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 08:03 PM
Jan 2024

And if they refuse he can send in guard units from surrounding states. Much more efficient to call in the professionals.

keithbvadu2

(37,024 posts)
19. Greg, why are you letting all these undocumented immigrants in. Trump said his wall is completed.
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 08:13 PM
Jan 2024

You know, the wall that Americans paid billions for to keep them out.

Response to keithbvadu2 (Reply #19)

moonshinegnomie

(2,502 posts)
21. what biden needs to do
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 08:25 PM
Jan 2024

send in border patrol to remove the wire. federalize the nat guard. arrest any texas troopers who get in the way and court martial and BCD them...

go after the officers in command too.

DetroitLegalBeagle

(1,927 posts)
33. Without invoking the Insurrection act
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 09:33 PM
Jan 2024

A federalized NG would be restricted from doing much of anything beyond standing down. Posse Comitatus applies to the NG while under federal control.

Calculating

(2,957 posts)
92. That will lose him political support
Wed Jan 24, 2024, 11:07 PM
Jan 2024

Most people I know acknowledge that we can't just let an infinite amount of migrants in. It's overwhelming our support services and ability to absorb them.

TexasDem69

(1,881 posts)
32. As an aside
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 09:33 PM
Jan 2024

We should not encourage the use of the military in the U.S. That’s a half-step from despotism.

Think. Again.

(8,745 posts)
35. Sounds like it's just a matter of some military re-shuffling...
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 09:35 PM
Jan 2024

...if one section of the National Guard is incapable of carrying out it's duties, send in others to help them out a bit.

Think. Again.

(8,745 posts)
43. Doesn't the word "National" mean anything?
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 09:50 PM
Jan 2024

It isn't the Texas State Militia that's shirking their responsibility, is it?

TexasDem69

(1,881 posts)
47. According to the internets
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 10:00 PM
Jan 2024

The national guard of each state is under the command of that state’s authorities, not any federal authority. Sorry.

Think. Again.

(8,745 posts)
50. So there is no overiding central authority...
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 10:07 PM
Jan 2024

...over the various state's National Guard units?

I admit I'm completely uninformed on military stuff but that seems odd to me.

They are each completely autonymous units?

TexasDem69

(1,881 posts)
51. No idea
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 10:09 PM
Jan 2024

Just repeating what I read after a 2 minute search. Seems like the national guards are at the beck and call of each state governor.

DetroitLegalBeagle

(1,927 posts)
52. National Guard can be federalized
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 10:13 PM
Jan 2024

Outside of that, they are under the command of the Governor. Texas has a State Guard though, and I thought they were involved in this as well. The Texas State Guard is a state defense force and those forces only answer to their respective governors. State defense forces are solely under State control.

Think. Again.

(8,745 posts)
55. A quick wikipedia search...
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 10:19 PM
Jan 2024

...tells me that the various state guard units comprise the larger National Guard which is a under the authority of a FEDERAL agency called The National Guard Bureau...

"The National Guard Bureau is the federal agency responsible for the administration of the National Guard established by the United States Congress as a joint bureau of the Department of the Army and the Department of the Air Force. It was created by the Militia Act of 1903. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, elevated the National Guard to a joint function of the Department of Defense. The 2007 NDAA, from the previous year, elevated the chief of the National Guard Bureau from a lieutenant general to a four-star general."

From: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Guard_Bureau

TexasDem69

(1,881 posts)
57. Nothing in that article
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 10:23 PM
Jan 2024

Says the national guard is under federal control. Texas’ national guard website says each state guard is under the direct control of the state governor. https://www.nationalguard.com/texas

Think. Again.

(8,745 posts)
58. Except the part that says exactly that...
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 10:28 PM
Jan 2024

...and which is included in the excerpt I quoted from the article:

"The National Guard Bureau is the federal agency responsible for the administration of the National Guard established by the United States Congress as a joint bureau of the Department of the Army and the Department of the Air Force."

TexasDem69

(1,881 posts)
63. Administration
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 10:36 PM
Jan 2024

Does not equal control. National guard of every state is under the command of the state governor UNLESS federalized.

orthoclad

(2,910 posts)
44. Send the Coast Guard or Navy
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 09:51 PM
Jan 2024

up the Rio Grande to remove all those obstacles to navigation in "waters of the US". The US government has the authority. Navigable rivers are Federal bailiwick.

Ah, but we need to do the High Road thing and negotiate with terrorists.

Marthe48

(17,105 posts)
46. Will U.S. agents take the traitor governor into custody?
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 09:59 PM
Jan 2024

and his henchmen? Nip the lawlessness in the bud. Enough is enough

TexasDem69

(1,881 posts)
49. WTF?
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 10:02 PM
Jan 2024

What treason did Abbott commit? Lawlessness does not equal treason. Texas should follow Supreme Court rulings but we aren’t a dictatorship.

spanone

(135,921 posts)
54. What do we do? Imagine trmp in the White House and a Dem Gov did this?
Tue Jan 23, 2024, 10:16 PM
Jan 2024

If there's no way to enforce a Supreme Court ruling, what's the point of having one?

I'm not suggesting troops, just wondering.

B.See

(1,343 posts)
80. The fundamental question is whether any state
Wed Jan 24, 2024, 12:06 AM
Jan 2024

has the right to defy the SCOTUS, and/or federal law. But as always, the so-called "law and order" party only has respect for THEIR laws and THEIR orders. Like when Abbott and DeSantis fraudulently send migrants all over the country without their knowledge of where the fk they're going, actions some have characterized as "kidnapping."

What the law says about DeSantis and Abbott sending migrants to blue states The migrants sent to Martha’s Vineyard have said they were told they they were going to Boston for expedited work papers. And critics have said migrants were “misled," that they might not have willingly participated, and have even compared the situation to “kidnapping.”

Also interesting is the MAGA hypocrisy when it comes to rush to DEFEND illegal immigrants who come from not-so-brown countries, as depicted in this news item:

Selective compassion: The Romeike family and the GOP’s immigration hypocrisy

The Romeikes are a German family who immigrated illegally into this country. They are fortunate because they recently received a one-year reprieve to be allowed to stay in their home in Tennessee thanks to a ton of pressure from right-wing religious conservatives. These would be the same conservatives who were perfectly fine with traumatizing toddlers or killing migrants. However, the Romeike family is somehow different. I can’t quite put my finger on it. …


Something of which Latino VOTERS in Texas and across the nation should TAKE NOTE.

area51

(11,937 posts)
82. The Romeikes are idiots for moving from a
Wed Jan 24, 2024, 02:33 AM
Jan 2024

1st world country with affordable healthcare to our healthcare dystopia.

 

The Contrarian

(87 posts)
85. Well what would you propose?
Wed Jan 24, 2024, 11:26 AM
Jan 2024

The Governor of Texas is directly disobeying the Supreme Court. And people are dying as a result. Should POTUS just shrug his shoulders?

limbicnuminousity

(1,407 posts)
93. 18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection
Wed Jan 24, 2024, 11:26 PM
Jan 2024

Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

Guess I'm a hawk on this. It's insurrection. Abbott willingly and publicly defied the Supreme Court. People have died. Delay at this point is going to add to the eventual body count.

edit to add: §252. Use of militia and armed forces to enforce Federal authority

"Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion."

Previous instances when the president has used his authority (there's more precedent than Wallace):

Ex. Ord. No. 10730, Sept. 24, 1957, 22 F.R. 7628, authorized the Secretary of Defense to order into the active military service of the United States units of the National Guard of the United States and of the Air National Guard of the United States within the State of Arkansas for an indefinite period and until relieved by appropriate orders in order to enforce any orders of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas for the removal of obstructions to justice in respect to enrollment and attendance at public schools in the Little Rock School District, Little Rock, Arkansas; authorized the Secretary of Defense to also use the armed forces of the United States to enforce such orders of the district court; and authorized the Secretary of Defense to delegate his authority to the Secretary of the Army or the Secretary of the Air Force.

Ex. Ord. No. 11053, Sept. 30, 1962, 27 F.R. 9681, authorized the Secretary of Defense to call into the active military service of the United States units of the Army National Guard and of the Air National Guard of the State of Mississippi for an indefinite period and until relieved by appropriate orders in order to enforce all orders of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi and of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit for the removal of obstructions to justice in the State of Mississippi; authorized the Secretary of Defense to also use the armed forces of the United States to enforce such court orders; and authorized the Secretary of Defense to delegate his authority to the Secretary of the Army or the Secretary of the Air Force.

Ex. Ord. No. 11111, June 11, 1963, 28 F.R. 5709, authorized the Secretary of Defense to call into the active military service of the United States units of the Army National Guard and of the Air National Guard of the State of Alabama for an indefinite period and until relieved by appropriate orders in order to enforce the laws of the United States within that State and the orders of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, to remove obstructions to justice, and to suppress unlawful assemblies, conspiracies, and domestic violence which oppose the laws of the United States or impede the course of justice under those laws within that State; authorized the Secretary of Defense to also use the armed forces of the United States for such purposes; and authorized the Secretary of Defense to delegate his authority to the Secretary of the Army or the Secretary of the Air Force.

Ex. Ord. No. 11118, Sept. 10, 1963, 28 F.R. 9863, authorized the Secretary of Defense to call into the active military service of the United States units of the Army National Guard and of the Air National Guard of the State of Alabama for an indefinite period and until relieved by appropriate orders in order to enforce the laws of the United States and any orders of United States Courts relating to the enrollment and attendance of students in public schools in the State of Alabama and to suppress unlawful assemblies, conspiracies, and domestic violence which oppose the law or impede the course of justice under the law within that State; authorized the Secretary of Defense to also use the armed forces of the United States for such purposes; and authorized the Secretary of Defense to delegate his authority to the Secretary of the Army or the Secretary of the Air Force.






Torchlight

(3,418 posts)
86. An idea almost as meritless as calling for Texas to secede.
Wed Jan 24, 2024, 12:03 PM
Jan 2024

Go over precedent, and look for those points that must to be met by law before the idea can be called anything other than impractical.

pinkstarburst

(1,327 posts)
101. Terrible political move
Sat Jan 27, 2024, 07:46 PM
Jan 2024

Both the left and the right are unhappy with the number of people currently crossing the southern border, the right because they're always unhappy, and the left because migrants are demanding resources in major cities and taking those resources away from underserved populations who never had enough resources to begin with.

Biden needs some sort of way to shut down the border or meter the number of people coming across per week in a humane way (not the terrible Greg Abbott way) so that he can say to the left and the right that he has heard their concerns and it's not just open migration across the border, but whatever number the major cities have the resources support until their immigration hearings. We can't just keep kicking the can down the road.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Time to deploy the US Arm...