Why are some people upset that Biden is sending military troops to the southern border?

They seem to be upset that Title 42 is expiring without an effective plan in place. Arizona is worried that 1500 agents doing paperwork with a pending surge will not be enough to keep everyone safe.

@KNOWITALL So, is it Republicans who are mostly speaking out about Biden’s move to do this? Somehow I had in my mind that Democrats might have been upset that sending military was somehow too aggressive. If I understand you correctly, the complaint is not enough military is being sent, they aren’t upset that military is being sent.

The military being sent there is only assigned to do paperwork? Some of them won’t actually be physically at the border to help agents who encounter migrants coming across?

I have a several reasons for not liking the decision to deploy troops to the southern border. First is that deploying US troops inside the US to support policies is illegal. Posse Comitatus (18 U.S.C. 1385) prohibits it. It is another example of federal government overreach.

The second reason for not liking this decision is for their role in things. It isn’t to secure the border, it is to make our border easier to breach illegally. It is to help processing these invaders as opposed to stopping them from crossing in the first place.

The third reason is that it is perfectly exemplary of how our federal government has avoided their duties for the past 30 years. One of their enumerated duties is to deal with border security and immigration. They have done nothing to secure the border (and have, in fact, fought against many efforts to secure it) and they refuse to overhaul the immigration system and laws. We are the only country in the world that has as open a border, except for possibly those nations that are shuttling immigrants through their borders to get to ours.

The fourth reason is that Title 42 is not a surprise. We have known when it is expiring for a long time. Nothing was done in the way of planning to deal with the upcoming humanitarian crisis. Sending some troops is basically political lip service.

Where is the Border Czar (Harris) in all this? Hey, she’s in line to be POTUS and she has proven she is incompetent. She has failed miserably and now we are in this situation.

@seawulf575 Are the governors of border states that are receiving the troops against the troops coming in? It seems to me those states would want the help.

@JLeslie That is another issue to be concerned about. The Governors are not receiving the troops. The troops are being assigned to Border Patrol. Again, they aren’t there to help secure the border, they are being sent there to streamline the flood coming across the border.

@seawulf575 Helping with paperwork does stop people from coming into the country if it includes that hearings will be done while the people are still being held at the border.

@JLeslie Looks like mostly Republicans and Independents are being critical.

Articles indicate the additional support is ONLY paperwork

@KNOWITALL Ok, thanks. I feel like your answer kind of contradicts the answer @Seawulf575 gave. He’s saying he doesn’t like the fed going into the state, and you seem to be saying Republicans feel like not enough help is being sent into the state. I’m not sure if you were speaking from your own opinion or just explaining to me what some Republicans and Independents are saying.

I saw AZ Senator Sinema in an interview saying the help being sent won’t be close to enough. She said Washington has no idea what the border areas are really like (I think she was talking about both the executive branch and congress) and she said politically both sides like keeping immigration a problem issue, too many politicians don’t want to solve it.

Listening to Sinema, I wasn’t sure where the parties stood in this recent move, because she’s Independent and doesn’t worry too much about agreeing with a party. I think she still plays politics sometimes, but maybe not as much as some.

I’m wondering who people who are critical of it would think would be better to do it? Administrative workers couldn’t handle the crowd if it got unruly. State police from the border states (Texas, NM) would be overwhelmed and then the states would complain that it’s not their responsibility to police the border.

@JLeslie Oh I agree with his points, but I’m not in a border state and certainly don’t expect a Democrat President to do anything about the border problems.

@jca2 Yeah, what exactly are people looking for? More military? That’s where I am confused? More ICE agents? @seawulf575 seems to be saying the state doesn’t like federal help, he used the word overreach, but immigration enforcement is a federal issue not a state issue. If Trump had sent in military to help I think the Republicans would have been fine with it, but maybe the most vocal of the Democrats would have been in an uproar if Trump did and ok with Biden doing it? The flipping politics makes things impossible. It is like most people can’t think without hearing which party is happy or upset. Fluther is a little more rational sometimes, which is why I ask here.

All along, even during Trump, I was saying more processers and judges need to be at the border to judge asylum cases at the time of entry. Two months ago I was at a presentation about immigration a retired INS judge was there, and he said basically what I did, so I felt like I was kind of on target, but that would not solve everything. I saw Majorkis last weekend say the US was working with other countries in Central America I think, to help the process for legal immigration and discourage coming without papers. Senator Sinema said very soon the deluge of people coming in is going to be much bigger than DC imagines. I don’t know if she is right.

@JLeslie You could ask me. 18 USC 1385 says:

Ӥ1385. Use of Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Space Force as posse comitatus

Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army, the Navy, the Marine Corps, the Air Force, or the Space Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”

As far as I can see, there is no express Act of Congress and this isn’t addressed in the Constitution. The soldiers/sailors/airmen/marines are going down there to help execute the laws of the country. This OUGHT to be an impeachable offense for Biden. Trump sent some active military (a couple hundred) which should have been the impeachable offense for him. His generals stopped him from sending thousands and thousands of troops like he wanted though. But again, the number isn’t the real issue. This law exists to ensure no party in power can just use the military as a tool to take over the country. That is why active military isn’t allowed. National Guard is an entirely different story and they are generally sent at the request of the state governors.

@seawulf575 Maybe if they are just pushing papers it doesn’t fall under the rule that you posted? I really don’t know, I am just thinking out loud. We have military in our states on bases. It isn’t like there isn’t military already in the state of TX, AZ, and CA.

Honestly, I don’t quite understand the context of the law you cited. …to execute the laws which laws? The laws of the federal government? Like allowing Black children into the white schools? Are immigration laws in as different category?

This has become more interesting as we talk about it. FBI, ICE, they are all in our states.

Edit: The military is to deal with and fight against foreign enemy or to keep peace in international situations.

@JLeslie Any job they are doing to help execute any civilian laws is encompassed in this law. The bases we have are slightly different because they are staging/training areas for the military. They aren’t out enforcing laws inside our borders, other than on their own base.

As for which laws, it could be any laws. Calling in the Marines to do DUI checkpoints, having the Air Force doing fly-bys to look for things going on illegally in a city/town/neighborhood…anything that is enforcing laws that don’t fall under the specific needs of the military. That is partly why we have a National Guard…to help states when they need more than the police can do in times of need. But the NG is state based…they work for the state and not the fed

@seawulf575 Ok, so let me get this straight, Republicans are worried and annoyed that the border is about to be flooded with people, many of them wanted a wall, but they don’t want troops helping to protect the border. Is that correct?

DUI is a state law. Border passing falls under federal law.

Our Coast Guard works our waters for immigration. I don’t know if they can apprehend people close to the state shoreline? I assume they can, but that would be interesting to know.

@JLeslie DUI and immigration laws are all civilian laws. The military cannot be brought in to enforce or help enforce civilian laws.

As for Republicans and what they want, I don’t speak for them. I’m an Independent. And while I most definitely want border security, I don’t want to start allowing our federal leaders from deploying active military inside our borders for any reason. History has shown the old adage to be true: Give them an inch and they’ll take a mile. If they never are allowed to violate this law, then there is no way to make it worse the next time. And this isn’t to say that the military couldn’t be used to secure the border, but it would take Congressional action to allow it.

What is really needed is some common sense immigration laws to be passed and enforced. Here’s a few: (1) asylum can only be requested at a port of entry. None of this crap of anywhere at any time. If you are so desperate that you need asylum, you should not be afraid to go to a point of entry to request it. (2) Any crossing at an unauthorized point needs to be treated as an invasion. Treat it as a federal felony. (3) If someone brings children illegally into this country it needs to be viewed as human trafficking and they need to be treated as such, regardless of whether the adults are the parents or not. If an American did something so egregious to their children as to drag them on a dangerous journey to knowingly commit a crime, those children would be taken away from that parent and would not be given back. Imagine a parent packing their children along to do an armed robbery? Just so that no one will shoot back at them?

There are dozens of things that could be done immediately and NONE of the politicians are willing to do any of them.

The short answer is, that there are some people who will be upset with Biden no matter what he does. I think most people above have adequately answered the question in enough detail that I’ll just leave my answer at that.

I was able to ask our resident expert where I live about this. He taught constitutional law (and other classes) at West Point for many years. He worked as a JAG lawyer for many years previous to that.

He said sending military within the states would fall under the Posse Comitatus Act which limits the fed from using the military in the states. There are exceptions where it is legal to use the military. One exception is for the military to help in support of local authorities when the state can’t handle what is happening, which I would think the border qualifies. He said the military can’t be arresting people, but various supportive actions are ok.

Another exception is when the state is not protecting the rights of citizens in accordance with US law and the constitution, like in the Little Rock Nine case.

Here’s a wikipedia link. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act