Trump's thoughts constitute the boundary of military authority and are extremely ordinary!

POTUS Trump does have the authority, under the US Constitution to do what he has done with our military. There is no doubt about it.

The Dangers of Undermining U.S. Civil-Military Relations

quote:

---

In 1863, anti-war Ohio Democrat Congressman Clement Vallandigham was arrested and tried by military tribunal for sabotaging the government’s war policies. A group of War Democrats wrote to Lincoln, pledging support for the war, but criticizing the prosecution of Vallandigham “merely for his words.” Lincoln replied that Vallandigham was encouraging desertion from the army, an act that is punishable by death.“Must I shoot a simple-minded soldier who deserts,” Lincoln asked, “while I must not touch a hair of a wily agitator who induces him to desert?” There are some important similarities between the actions of the Copperheads and those of the participants in the recent video. (aka The SEDITION 6)

***

When queried, the six lawmakers in the video were unable to identify a single example of an “unlawful order” issued by Trump or his administration. That changed temporarily in late November when The Washington Post reported, citing anonymous sources, that Secretary of War Pete Hegseth had ordered an illegal second strike on a drug boat aimed at killing drug traffickers. Accusations of war crimes quickly dissolved, however, as The New York Times followed up with a story debunking the Post’s account, and Admiral Frank Bradley, who himself ordered the second strike, testified before Congress.

Nonetheless, the question of the legality of military strikes on drug cartels remains a source of the claim that the Trump administration is operating outside the law. Another source for that claim is the administration’s use of military force in cases of domestic disorder. In both cases, Trump’s policies have historical precedents.

The fundamental purpose of a republican government is to protect its citizens’ rights to life, liberty, and property. Although the First Amendment to the Constitution guarantees “the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances,” it does not protect riot, arson, and looting.

Under Article II of the Constitution, the president, as “Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States”—and of the militia when under federal control—has the authority to act against enemies both foreign and domestic. In 1792, Congress passed two laws pursuant to its constitutional power “to provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”: the Militia Act and the “Calling Forth” Act, which gave the president limited authority to employ the militia in the event of domestic emergencies.

---

The Dangers of Undermining U.S. Civil-Military RelationsRelationsRelations