Mastodon Feed: Post

Mastodon Feed

Boosted by jsonstein@masto.deoan.org ("Jeff Sonstein"):
joshuajfriedman.com@bsky.brid.gy ("Joshua J. Friedman") wrote:

"This country has a longstanding and foundational tradition of resistance to government overreach, especially in the form of military intrusion into civil affairs. ... "This historical tradition boils down to a simple proposition: this is a nation of Constitutional law, not martial law."

Furthermore, this country has a longstanding and foundational tradition of resistance to government overreach, especially in the form of military intrusion into civil affairs. “That tradition has deep roots in our history and found early expression, for example, in . . . the constitutional provisions for civilian control of the military.” Laird v. Tatum, 408 U.S. 1, 15 (1972); see also James Madison, Address to the Constitutional Convention (1787), reprinted in 1 Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, at 465 (Max Farrand ed., 1911) (“A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence [against] foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home.”). This historical tradition boils down to a simple proposition: this is a nation of Constitutional law, not martial law. Defendants have made a range of arguments that, if accepted, risk blurring the line between civil and military federal power—to the detriment of this nation.