Yes, the president can deploy troops to enforce immigration law

President-elect Trump’s confirmation last month of his plan to deploy military assets for immigration enforcement sparked a constitutional debate. Legal scholars and commentators quickly declared such action forbidden by long-standing prohibitions on military involvement in domestic law enforcement. But this conventional wisdom misreads both the letter and spirit of American law. A careful examination of a pair of longstanding statutes reveals military support for immigration enforcement is permissible.

(Article by Patrick O’Malley and Joe Buccino republished from RealClearWire.com)

The issue hinges on two 19th century laws: the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 and the Insurrection Act of 1807. When properly understood, both allow the President to use active-duty military forces to support the deportation of illegal immigrants.

Posse Comitatus: A Firewall Between the Military and Law Enforcement

Since our nation’s founding, Americans have been wary of standing armies and their role in civilian affairs. Concerns about military involvement in domestic law enforcement dates back to colonial experiences under British rule, particularly the quartering of British troops in civilian homes and their use to enforce British law. This experience was so troubling that it influenced several key elements of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

The Third Amendment, ratified in 1791, explicitly prohibits American soldiers from occupying private homes inside the county during peacetime. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, informed by a distrust of a large military force employed against its citizenry, codified the separation of military and civilian law enforcement. This act established a firewall between military force and civilian law enforcement.

The term “posse comitatus,” Latin for “power of the country,” dates back to the medieval England tradition of local sheriffs organizing citizens to assist in maintaining public order. A form of this practice made its way to the American Old West: sheriffs called for volunteers – “a posse” of the county – to chase down bandits. This power allowed sheriffs to deputize civilians to temporarily suppress lawlessness and maintain order.

The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 derives its name from this practice with a crucial distinction: it specifically prohibits the military from acting as this civilian force. The law’s architects recognized that using soldiers instead of citizens for domestic law enforcement would fundamentally alter the relationship between military power and civil society. They sought to ensure that federal troops were kept out of local law enforcement.

Yet this legislative barrier against using military force for domestic law enforcement is not absolute. Congress regularly makes exceptions, allowing military support to civilian law enforcement for actions such as protecting federal propertyconducting domestic counterterror operationsengaging in counterdrug efforts. In cases related to immigration enforcement, courts have ruled the Posse Comitatus Act only prohibits direct military involvement in law enforcement actions such as detaining citizens. Support activities, from transportation to surveillance, remain legal. This distinction between direct enforcement and support operations provides the legal basis for President-elect Trump’s proposed use of military assets in his planned deportation program.

Keep reading

Big Pharma Eli Lilly Announces $3B Manufacturing Expansion in Kenosha Following Strategic Meeting with Trump and RFK Jr. at Mar-a-Lago

Kenosha, Wisconsin, is poised for an economic revival, thanks to a groundbreaking $3 billion investment from pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly.

This announcement comes just days after a high-stakes meeting at Mar-a-Lago between President-elect Donald Trump, his nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and top executives from major pharmaceutical companies, including Eli Lilly and Pfizer.

The meeting, which also included Trump’s incoming chief of staff Susie Wiles and representatives from the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), signals a potential realignment of U.S. health policy.

While the specifics remain under wraps, insiders suggest the discussions centered on finding cures for cancer, among other topics, according to Axios.

This development is being hailed as a masterstroke by Trump, who has long championed bringing jobs back to the U.S. and revamping the pharmaceutical industry to prioritize American innovation and production.

Eli Lilly’s decision to expand its Kenosha facility is being lauded by Trump supporters as a direct result of the strategic discussions in Mar-a-Lago.

According to the company’s press release, the $3 billion investment will not only enhance the production of injectable medicines but also create 750 high-paying jobs in Kenosha County.

The expansion will also generate more than 2,000 construction jobs, making it one of the largest economic boosts in the region’s history.

Keep reading

Pure Gold: Trump’s Plan for Illegals Whose Own Countries Won’t Take Them Back

Illegal immigrants facing deportation could be sent to places other than their home countries under a plan developed by President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team.

Deportation can be stalled when a nation, such as Venezuela, refuses to accept citizens America wants to deport.

To address that, Trump’s aides are trying to develop a list of nations that will accept illegal immigrants who are not citizens of that nation, according to NBC, which cited sources it did not name.

NBC listed multiple nations in and around the Caribbean Sea as possible destinations, including Turks and Caicos, the Bahamas, Panama and Grenada.

The office of Bahamas Prime Minister Philip Davis said it was approached by the transition team but rejected the concept, according to the Guardian.

Mexico, which has also been mentioned as a possible destination for illegal immigrants, wants to avoid taking deported illegal immigrants from other countries, according to Reuters.

“We hope to reach an agreement with the Trump administration so that, in case these deportations happen, they send people from other countries directly to their countries of origin,” President Claudia Sheinbaum said.

Sheinbaum did not say Mexico would flat-out refuse deported illegal immigrants.

NBC’s report said Trump could use the threat of tariffs against Mexican products to force Mexico to accept illegal immigrants from other countries.

NBC reported that in 2019, Trump flew some illegal immigrants being deported to Guatemala.

NBC said the numbers involved were small, and that practice ended in 2020 as the COVID-19 pandemic dawned.

The NBC report said that the Trump administration is trying to develop a system that can deport illegal immigrants within a week of their arrests.

Keep reading

Ukraine’s best hope for peace looks a lot like Donald Trump

Last week, people who fear a third world war got more reasons to worry. Ukraine, with permission from the White House, struck Russian territory with long-range missiles supplied by the United States. Russian President Vladimir Putin has long warned that such an attack would mean that NATO and Russia “are at war,” and he has raised the specter of nuclear retaliation. Granted, these threats could be bluffs, but last week Putin gave them some credibility by (a) loosening the conditions for Russia’s use of nuclear weapons, (b) firing a multiple-warhead, nuclear-capable missile at Ukraine for the first time in the war, and (c) declaring, in a speech after the strike, that Russia would be entitled to attack any nations that aid Ukraine’s strikes into Russian territory.

While Putin’s caution during previous crises suggests he’s not about to reach for the nuclear button just yet, his dramatic response has complicated any path to a peace deal. Meanwhile, some liberal voices have predicted that Trump’s looming presidency, far from hastening an end to the conflict as Trump has promised to do, will prolong it. If Trump were to cut off arms to Ukraine, he’d remove an important incentive for Putin to call it quits, according to Ben Rhodes, a former White House official under Barack Obama. Among conservatives who advocate foreign policy restraint, there is worry that Trump’s hawkish cabinet nominees portend a departure from the peace agenda he campaigned on. As for hawkish critics of Trump on both left and right, many believe that he may end the war by just giving away the farm to Putin.

These concerns are valid. But Trump has good reasons to try proving the doubters wrong. He understands that foreign policy debacles can crater a president’s approval ratings, and he has staked his reputation on being able to end a conflict that started and continues to escalate on President Joe Biden’s watch. “I’m the only one who can get the war stopped,” he told Newsweek this September. Brokering a respectable peace would be a boon to his legacy and an embarrassment for his political opponents—and Trump loves splattering egg on the faces of his detractors. So there is room for optimism alongside the worry. Trump may well manage not only to stop the war but also to get Ukraine the best deal it could realistically hope for.

Some say Trump’s Ukraine promises are hollow since he hasn’t outlined a viable peace deal. But Trump maintains, plausibly enough, that he can’t reveal details of a plan without boxing himself in. It would be better, he says, to hammer out a deal with Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky behind closed doors, which means keeping mum on specifics for now. Despite Trump’s reticence, there are signs of the kind of deal he’d push for—and signs that both Putin and Zelensky would go for it.

This fall, J.D. Vance, Trump’s running mate and now vice president-elect, laid out a likely settlement: The current battle lines become a “heavily fortified” demilitarized zone to prevent future Russian aggression; Kyiv retains its sovereign independence; and Russia gets assurances that Ukraine won’t join NATO. Moscow would presumably also get to keep the lands in eastern and southern Ukraine that it now holds.

Keep reading

Trump Slams Biden’s Corruption After Hunter Pardon: ‘Such an Abuse and Miscarriage of Justice!’

On Sunday, outgoing White House resident Joe Biden issued a full and unconditional pardon to his son, Hunter Biden, absolving him of any federal crimes committed between 2014 and 2024.

Hunter Biden’s pardon comes in the wake of convictions for felony gun charges and a guilty plea to tax evasion. The younger Biden’s legal troubles have long been the focal point of Republican scrutiny, with allegations of influence-peddling, bribery, and shady dealings involving foreign entities like Ukrainian energy firm Burisma.

According to Newsweek, Hunter Biden was supposed to be sentenced on December 12 in Delaware for three felonies related to purchasing a gun while using drugs in October 2018. He could face up to 25 years in prison.

On December 16, Biden will be sentenced in Los Angeles for federal tax-related charges after pleading guilty in September. He faces up to 17 years in prison for tax offenses.

The indictment alleges that Biden engaged in a four-year scheme, failing to pay at least $1.4 million in self-assessed federal taxes from 2016 to 2019.

With one stroke of his pen, Joe Biden has erased the legal consequences for his son’s actions while doubling down on claims that the justice system has been politically weaponized—against Hunter, no less.

In a public statement, Biden sought to defend his decision, claiming Hunter was “unfairly prosecuted” due to political motivations.

The President framed his actions as those of a father protecting his son from what he called “raw politics” infecting the justice system.

Keep reading

CNN Correspondent Says the Quiet Part Out Loud – Admits Hunter Was Pardoned Out of Fear His Family Would Be Investigated by Trump

Jeff Zeleny, Chief National Affairs Correspondent from CNN, said the quiet part out loud on Sunday night after news broke that Joe Biden had granted Hunter Biden a blanket pardon for any criminal acts he partook in from 2014 to present including, trading influence for cash, trafficking prostitutes, and taking on the role of the Biden Family bagman.

Jeff Zeleny: We were told that this came to a head this weekend, and this is why President Biden decided now to do this. But as Isaac was just saying, that really is a sense of the conversation that has been going on really inside the family.

I’m told this has been very much a family discussion and something that has been not widely shared or discussed as a policy matter inside the West Wing.

But there was a worry of future prosecutions or future the potential of what the incoming Trump Justice Department could do.

So that, of course, is fretted in all of this as well.

But for now, this moment, this certainly is a decision that President Biden, I’m guessing, did not come too easily. But as you played that statement before, so much has changed since June when he told David Muir of ABC News that he would not do that.

Of course, his station in life has changed. Did not complete his campaign. So that is why, leading up to this, that’s why I’m told a decision was reached finally this weekend after spending time together in Nantucket.

Keep reading

California moves to fund state justice department, prep litigation for incoming Trump admin: report

California is bracing for potential legal battles against President-elect Donald Trump’s incoming administration, with Governor Gavin Newsom vowing last week that the state will not be caught “flat-footed” despite claiming he hopes that “there’s not one lawsuit with the Trump administration.” 

The legislature has a special session planned for appropriating funds to the California Justice Department and other agencies before Trump takes office, Politico reported.

During Trump’s first term, California’s Department of Justice (DOJ) significantly ramped up its legal efforts, with then-Attorney General Xavier Becerra filing over 100 lawsuits challenging federal policies on issues such as healthcare, immigration, and the environment. The department’s annual litigation budget of $2.5 million more than tripled during that time. 

Now, Attorney General Rob Bonta and the California DOJ are preparing for another round of legal confrontations. The outlet detailed how the state plans to navigate potential changes under Trump’s second term. 

“California’s DOJ requires significant research to build a case. For example, if Trump and his administration were to make changes to the Medicaid program, that would affect who would be covered in California,” the report explained. “To challenge such changes, the state’s justice department would need to work with various state agencies to develop evidence, establish harm (and identify who would be affected) and find experts to testify to those facts in federal court.” 

Bonta’s office is arguing that such litigation often recovers more money than it costs. For instance, blocking a citizenship question from the 2020 census led to $850,000 being returned to the federal government. Similarly, immigration-related cases during Trump’s first term resulted in California recouping nearly $30 million in 2017 and 2018.

The California DOJ, which employs 5,176 people—including 1,390 lawyers—faces potential capacity challenges. Each case typically requires multiple attorneys, and officials warn that a surge in lawsuits could stretch resources thin. 

Keep reading

Incoming Border Czar Tom Homan Says Trump Administration Will Investigate Foreign Countries and NGOs Behind Border Invasion

In an interview on Fox News, incoming Trump Border Czar Tom Homan laid out an aggressive and detailed plan to combat the border crisis and restore order after what he called “four years of disastrous open-border policies” under the Biden administration.

Speaking with former Trump advisor Kellyanne Conway on the Hannity show, Homan promised to hold foreign governments, NGOs, and even elements of the United Nations accountable for their roles in fueling the migrant surge.

Homan said that the groundwork for securing the border has already begun, even before President-elect Trump takes office on January 20th. He is already coordinating with Texas Governor Greg Abbott to secure the southern border.

Keep reading

Trump’s Team Discusses Halting All Weapons Shipments to Ukraine If It Refuses to Enter Peace Talks

According to BRICS News President Trump’s team is proposing halting all weapons shipments to Ukraine if the country does not enter peace talks with Russia.

Trump has been pushing to deescalate the tensions in the region.

Earlier this week Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told reporters Trump had been trying to negotiate peace between Ukraine and Russia but Joe Biden continues to escalate the war between the two nations before he leaves office.

Keep reading

Trump: Deal Made With Mexico Leader To CLOSE THE BORDER

President-elect Trump announced Wednesday that he has spoken to Mexico’s president and that she has agreed to stop mass migration of people across the southern border into the United States.

In a statement posted on Truth Social, Trump said his conversation with president Claudia Sheinbaum was “wonderful,” and that the two also discussed strategies to tackle drug trafficking.

“She has agreed to stop Migration through Mexico, and into the United States, effectively closing our Southern Border. We also talked about what can be done to stop the massive drug inflow into the United States, and also, U.S. consumption of these drugs. It was a very productive conversation!” Trump wrote.

Keep reading