APNewsBreak: California rejects border duties for troops

quote:

---

SAN DIEGO (AP) — California has rejected the federal government’s initial plans for National Guard troops to the border because the work is considered too closely tied to immigration enforcement, two U.S. officials told The Associated Press.

---

I guess Cali gets to pick and choose which "laws of the land" they get to follow.

I support Calexit!!

quote:

---

because the work is considered too closely tied to immigration enforcement

---

quote:

---

National Guard

---

The very name states their purpose...California needs to be defunded...

Cut off federal funding. California can pay for their own shite.

quote:

---

Thought they were under Command and Control of Fed Govt.

---

What does that even mean?

Basically immigration is in the hands of the federal government. If they don't have the resources to do their job, they need to ask Congress for the funding required to get the job done. What they don't need to do is ask local and state governments, already strapped for cash, to do the federal government's job for them. they've got their own jobs to do.

Sounds like an excellent time to close at least two military instillations in Cali in order to save a bit of cash.

In fact getting from 32 down to 10 should be resonable.

quote:

---

What does that even mean?

Basically immigration is in the hands of the federal government. If they don't have the resources to do their job, they need to ask Congress for the funding required to get the job done. What they don't need to do is ask local and state governments, already strapped for cash, to do the federal government's job for them. they've got their own jobs to do.

---

The way this stuff works, with regard to tasking and funding, is that it is far more efficient for a state to agree to what the fed wants, and for the state to mobilize and run its Guard - then get reimbursed by the fed - rather than have the fed just come and take over a subset of the Guard to do a mission. Cali is losing a lot here.

The US Army exists to defend the US from foreign invasion, which is expressly authorized by the US Constitution. Guarding the Mexican border was the Army’s primary peacetime mission until 1940, and no one ever declared this was in violation of this 1878 act. The US Border Patrol wasn’t even formed until 1924, so claiming the intent of this law was to prevent US Army troops from guarding the border is absurd. The map at left shows US Army forts in Texas in the late 1880s when the entire US Army had fewer than 40,000 soldiers; it has 500,000 today. Clearly, defending the US border was a primary mission of the US Army for decades after this act was passed.

Some may argue that Chapter 18, Section 375 of Title 10 US Code prevents military personnel from direct participation in law enforcement. However, defending US borders from foreign invaders is not law enforcement, it’s the basic purpose of the US military. While defending these United States from invasion, civilian law enforcement may be called upon to assist the US military. Does anyone believe the Border Patrol must operate fighter aircraft because the US Air Force can’t intercept aircraft crossing into the US because that’s “law enforcement”?

When you read about proposals in Congress to put US troops on the border, those are not proposals to allow US troops on the border, but proposals to force the President to put troops back on the border. However, recent Presidents have listened to their corporate advisors and their slogans and ignored the threat of unsecured US borders.