Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito criticized his colleagues’ Tuesday ruling temporarily blocking President Trump from deploying the National Guard in Chicago — calling it “unwise,” “imprudent” and “puzzling” in a scathing dissent.
The staunch conservative accused the six-justice majority of not giving enough deference to Trump, who said the deployment was needed to protect federal immigration officers sweeping the Windy City for illegal migrants as part of “Operation Midway Blitz.”
In a three-page unsigned ruling, the justices ruled that “[a]t this preliminary stage, the Government has failed to identify a source of authority that would allow the military to execute the laws in Illinois.”
“[Trump] has not invoked a statute that provides an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act,” which restricts the military from domestic law-enforcement operations, the majority added.
“Instead, he relies on inherent constitutional authority that, according to the Government, allows him to use the military to protect federal personnel and property,” the justices went on. --->READ MORE HERE
 |
| Ethan Swope/The Associated Press |
Conservative justice warns decision could limit federal government's ability to protect personnel during unrest
Justice Samuel Alito criticized the Supreme Court’s majority in a sharp dissent Tuesday after the high court decided 6–3 to temporarily block President Donald Trump from deploying the National Guard in Chicago.
Alito said the high court’s majority made "unwise" and "imprudent" determinations to reach its decision. He said the majority also did not give enough deference to Trump after the president found that agitators were hindering immigration officers and other federal personnel from doing their jobs in Chicago and that the National Guard needed to step in to help.
"Whatever one may think about the current administration’s enforcement of the immigration laws or the way ICE has conducted its operations, the protection of federal officers from potentially lethal attacks should not be thwarted," Alito wrote.
The lawsuit stemmed from Trump invoking a rarely used federal law to federalize about 300 members of the National Guard and deploy them to protect federal personnel and buildings.
The Trump administration argued that protesters were obstructing, assaulting and threatening ICE officers, and the National Guard was needed because Illinois’ resistant Democratic leaders and local law enforcement were not adequately addressing the matter, the administration said.
Illinois sued, and the lower courts blocked the National Guard’s deployment, finding that Trump had not satisfied criteria in the law that said the president could only use the reserved forces when he was "unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States." The Supreme Court’s decision upheld that finding while the case proceeds through the courts.
The Supreme Court's majority said in an unsigned order that "regular forces" meant the U.S. military, not ICE or other civilian law enforcement officers. The majority said that since Trump had not identified any justification for using the regular military for domestic purposes in Chicago, there was no way to exhaust that option before using the National Guard. --->READ MORE HERE
If you like what you see, please "Like" and/or Follow us on FACEBOOK here, GETTR here, and TWITTER here.
No comments:
Post a Comment