Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: carranza2 who wrote (222307)	10/3/2007 5:27:17 PM
From: D. Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794344

Ah, you should have taken the Constitution out of it because there is nothing relevant in it dealing with insurrections and the use of force aganst your bretheren See the Prize Cases, 67 U.S. 635 (1862) for a discussion of the authority of the President to act under the war powers to repel invasion or insurrection, foreign or domestic, in the absence of Congressional declaration of war. Also, you should have said that any acts under the PCA and/or the IA would be OK provided Congress acts Congress has already acted. It enacted the Insurrection Act. So Posse Comitatus doesn't apply wherever the Insurrection Act comes into play. PC reads: Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air 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.