Air Force Has Troops Remove Names, Unit Patches from Uniforms During Deportation Flights
The Air Force is the only one of the military branches involved in President Donald Trump's mandated border mission to not disclose publicly the number of service members or what units they're coming from.
24/7
The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878, by President Rutherford B. Hayes that limits the powers of the federal government in the use of federal military personnel to enforce domestic policies within the United States.
Possie Comitatus has nothing to do with aircraft security.
Who said anything about aircraft security.....?
They are being ordered to enforce domestic policy on us soil, which is exactly what the law is made to prevent.
Who said anything about aircraft security
Me, I did. That's what Fly Away Security Teams do, that's what the USAF uses to secure it's aircraft, domestically and abroad.
Lol, do you think the plane is flying itself? The security of the plane isn't a problem, the problem is the mission of the plane in the first place.
You're moving the goal posts. The Air Force isn't enforcing domestic policy. They're operating an aircraft to provide logistics for other federal agencies.
The other agencies are enforcing domestic policy, not the Air Force. The people are not in the custody of the Air Force and they were not captured by the Air Force. ICE is simply using the Air Force equipment as transport and Air Force personnel operate and secure that equipment.
You're moving the goal posts. The Air Force isn't enforcing domestic policy. They're operating an aircraft to provide logistics for other federal agencies.
That's a semantic dispute, and service members have received sanctions for even support roles that are not directly excluded in the act .
"The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits using active duty personnel to "execute the laws"; however, there is disagreement over whether this language may apply to troops used in an advisory, support, disaster response, or other homeland defense role, as opposed to domestic law enforcement.[1]
On March 10, 2009, members of the U.S. Army Military Police Corps from Fort Rucker were deployed to Samson, Alabama, in response to a shooting spree. Samson officials confirmed that the soldiers assisted in traffic control and securing the crime scene. The governor of Alabama did not request military assistance, nor did President Barack Obama authorize their deployment. Subsequent investigation found that the Posse Comitatus Act was violated and several military members received "administrative actions".[22][23] "
You're quoting things with footnotes but not linking the footnotes.
The Air Force isn't executing the laws. Saying that it is semantics isn't an argument that. All legal arguments are based on semantics.
The people in ICE custody were captured by ICE. ICE executed the laws. Once the people were identified as foreign nationals, by ICE, and determined to require deportation, by ICE, then they are transported, by ICE, to their country of origin.
The deportees are in ICE custody (see the ICE agents in the OP) until they're in their country of origin where they are released, by ICE.
The Air Force simply operates the aircraft and provides all of the required logistics to do so.
This is no different than ICE using Delta to return people to their country. It would be silly to say that Delta has become a law enforcement organization because ICE purchased tickets to transport people to their country of origin.
You're quoting things with footnotes but not linking the footnotes.
And.....? So you have a logical retort, or lack the ability to use google?
The Air Force isn't executing the laws. Saying that it is semantics isn't an argument that.
And you don't have the authority to make that claim. Nor are you providing any evidence to support your claim.
The people in ICE custody were captured by ICE. ICE executed the laws. Once the people were identified as foreign nationals, by ICE, and determined to require deportation, by ICE, then they are transported, by ICE, to their country of origin.
Ice doesn't have the physical ability to transport people to their country of origin.
The Air Force simply operates the aircraft and provides all of the required logistics to do so.
And military members have been sanctioned for support roles under the act in the past.
This is no different than ICE using Delta to return people to their country.
Except Delta is a private company and has the ability to not comply.
And…? So you have a logical retort, or lack the ability to use google?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(philosophy)
The burden of proof (Latin: onus probandi, shortened from Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat – the burden of proof lies with the one who speaks, not the one who denies) is the obligation on a party in a dispute to provide sufficient warrant for its position.
It is not my responsibility to support your argument by trying to find the source of your quotes. That's not how the burden of proof works.
Considering that your position is that this is a violation of Posse Comitatus including a quote that says "there is disagreement over whether this language may apply to troops used in an advisory, support, disaster response, or other homeland defense role, as opposed to domestic law enforcement.[1]" seems to contradict your own argument.
The Air Force is under the command of the Commander in Chief and so they are required to comply with lawful orders.
Providing transportation for other federal agencies is a lawful use of military equipment under 10 U.S. Code § 2642(a)(3):
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/2642
(a) Authority.—Subject to subsection (b), the Secretary of Defense may authorize the use of the Department of Defense reimbursement rate for military transportation services provided by a component of the Department of Defense as follows:
[...]
(3) For military transportation services provided to any element of the Federal Government outside the Department of Defense in circumstances other than those specified in paragraphs (1) and (2), but only if the Secretary of Defense determines that the provision of such services will promote the improved use of transportation capacity without any negative effect on the national security objectives or the national security interests contained within the United States commercial transportation industry.
So, as long as the Secretary of Defense approves of the flights, then it is legal for the Air Force to provide military transportation services to any element of the Federal Government outside the Department of Defense. ICE is an element of the Federal Government outside the Department of Defense and so the use of Air Force equipment to provide transportation for ICE is legal under 10 U.S. Code § 2642(a)(3).
The Air Force isn’t enforcing domestic policy.
Yes, it is.
Its the exact same reason we had a 2 day training on the Posse Comitatus Act, before engaging in JTF-6 border interdiction missions.
We specifically were told we had to have names and unit insignia, because we were operating on US soil. And we were not allowed to touch anyone inside of the US border. We couldn't even use mast mounted sights to locate people inside of US soil.
Because it's outright illegal to do so. Because the military are not law enforcement, and we only know how to handle EPWs, and not civilian prisoners outside of a war zone.
They were captured by ICE. Not the Air Force.
They were determined to be undocumented by ICE. Not the Air Force.
Their deportation was chartered by ICE. Not the Air Force.
The people are in the custody of ICE. Not the Air Force.
The Air Force is providing the flight logistics from a US Base to a foreign country in support of another federal agency.
They're not deploying infantry into Mexico out of Brownsville, Texas. The Air Force is completely within legal boundaries to fly from the US to a foreign country.
e: You know you don't have an argument when your only response is to downvote.