0
martial law
NO. The military itself does NOT get to apply it's law to civilians, nor engage in civilian law enforcement activities, per the Posse Comitatas Act. That is, the military may not engage in law enforcement activities on US soil where civilian law applies. Period. No exception. Only in special areas (generally military bases) designated by Congress as permanent military installations can military law be applied to civilians.
In an "emergency", certain civilian leaders (mostly, the Executive leader of a jurisdiction) may go through a specified process to declare "Martial Law", which is a special subsection of civilian law. The enforcement of the sections of Martial Law is still NOT legally allowed to be done by members of the US Military.
The fuzzy part is the National Guard. The NG occupies a strange space in the US system: normally, it is defined as the civilian militia of a State, and, while its members are subject to Military Law while on duty, the NG as a whole is responsible to the State Governor (and, ultimately, the State Legislature). As such, the Governor (when invoking Martial Law) can effectively deputize all members of the NG as Law Enforcement Officers of that state. Thus, a NG member in a place where Martial Law has been declared, has the power to detain and arrest civilians. Infractions are still of civilian law, and cases tried in civilian courts.
The news and TV shows gloss over this all the time, but it's a very important distinction. Let's spin a typical scenario of a disaster: A huge hurricane runs through a state, causing widespread disaster. Afterwards, the police departments are devastated and unable to control looting. The Governor then declares martial law in specific areas (usually not statewide) under his jurisdiction. The State's National Guard is deployed, but is overwhelmed. The Governor requests aid from nearby states, which send their NG to help. This still isn't enough, and the Governor requests federal aid. US Army troops are deployed.
In the above scenario, presuming that the problem is not a general rebellion (i.e. merely a disaster, not the start of a civil war), the original State's NG is empowered automatically as Law Enforcement. If there is a pre-existing agreement between states (or, the Legislature manages to pass one during the emergency), then the Governor can recognize the other states' NG as valid law enforcement too. HOWEVER, the US Army cannot be employed in a law enforcement role, no matter what the Governor wishes. The US Army can still help with rescue and all sorts of other roles, but law enforcement duties cannot be performed by them.
The line is very clear, and very old. No active-duty member of the US Armed Forces may engage in civilian law enforcement activities in a civilian area, with one exception: specifically designed military law enforcement personnel may enforce federal civilian law wherever it applies. No military member may ever enforce military law in a civilian area, under any circumstances. They may always enforce military law in areas where it is specifically designated as applying (e.g. military bases), and they may arrest and detain for violations of civilian law in a place normally enforcing military law, but such violators must be turned over to civilian authorities for prosecution.
Wiki User
∙ 11y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What is different between Martial Law and Military law?
Martial law is law enforcement by the military on a civilian population at times of emergency. Military law is a special kind of law code which military personnel become subject to when they enlist in the military. It would normally be enforced by the military police and courts Marshal. Military law does not normally apply to non enlisted personnel.
Which is supreme between civilian authority and military authority during times of martial law?
It is written in Art II Sec 3 that Civilian authority is at all times supreme over the military. Martial law also aims in protecting the people, it doesn't necessarily mean that they are supreme over the civilians during this time.
How long did the war hawks last?
The term, usually shortened to Hawks- is still used for those favoring military action and/or heavy defense spending. also applied to aggressive law-enforcement policy.
What is it called when military forces are used to keep order?
You could be thinking of a state of emergency, you could be thinking of peacekeeping (although peacekeeping is largely a farce), you could be thinking of martial law... it varies based on context.
When does civilian law supersede military law?
Civilian law is typically always in place. Military law is only invoked in extreme emergencies. However, military personnel are always subject to military law. The Adjutant General will negotiate with the civilian authorities if there is any situation where it is not definite as to which takes precedence. Actually, in the United States, no military person (or, for that matter, anyone other than the Judical Branch) can arbitrarily decide to enforce military law in a place where it is not currently in place. Not even the President can decide to apply military law in a place where civil law is currently in force (indeed, this is one of the major contentious issues around the classification of terrorists as "enemy combatants", and the legality of this move is still being subject to litigation). The misnowmer "martial law" does not actually apply Military Law, but rather enforce a certain subsection of civilian law. For instance, let's say that there is major rioting in a city, and the National Guard is called in to restore order, and "martial law" is declared by the city's major (or perhaps, the state governor). Members of the National Guard are subject to Military law, and any infractions they commit will naturally be covered by military trial. HOWEVER, should a National Guardsman capture a looter (or other criminal), they are then prosecuted under CIVILIAN LAW, even though "martial law" was declared. Martial law in this case is a specific subsection of civilian law, which criminalizes certain activities which are normally permissible under ordinary civilian law. Back to the original question: as Congress is the creator of both military and civilian law, it can decide whether civilian or military law applies in a situation where the military normally has first jurisdiction. There are a myriad number of places this can occur, so naming them all is not possible. In addition, the Constitution is still the highest law of the land, and is supreme over both military and civilian law. Do note that many crimes are not covered by military law, but only civilian law, so it is entirely possible for a person normally subject to military jurisdiction to be prosecuted by civilian authorities without military acquiecence. For example, Insider Trading is a civilian crime, with no military equivalent, so it would be entirely possible to charge a military serviceperson on a military base with this civilian crime.
Is Martial law a noun?
Yes, the term 'martial law' is a noun, a compound, common, abstract, uncountable noun; a word for the law applied by military forces in occupied territory or in an emergency.
Law invoked by government military forces in an emergency?
Martial Law
How did Lincoln prevent Kentucky Missouri and Maryland from succeding?
he had to imposed a martial law on the border states. a martial law is a law administered by military forces that is invoked by a government during an emergency.
What law was invoked by government military forces in an emergency?
you might be talking about Martial Law
What is different between Martial Law and Military law?
Martial law is law enforcement by the military on a civilian population at times of emergency. Military law is a special kind of law code which military personnel become subject to when they enlist in the military. It would normally be enforced by the military police and courts Marshal. Military law does not normally apply to non enlisted personnel.
Connection between Marshal Law and the Military?
Marshal law is the imposition of a military rule by Military authorities over designed regions on a emergency basis. Marshal law also known as martial law is imposed on a temporary base.
Law that is administered during periods of strict military control?
martial law
Can military kill during martial law?
Yes
What was not related to African-American citizens during the 1920s?
Emergency Quota Law
What does a state of emergency is it the same as marshal law?
A state of emergency is a legal declaration that grants temporary powers and authorities to the government to manage a crisis or a serious situation. It allows for the suspension of certain rights and the implementation of special measures to ensure public safety and restore normalcy. Martial law, on the other hand, is a more extreme measure that involves the military taking control of civilian government operations.
If martial law is declared will they kill all inmates?
Martial Law has nothing to do with inmates, another word for Marshall law would be in an State of Emergency.. meaning the military would be in control of a town,city, state. As in an example after Hurricane Katrina the state was in an emergency. Curfews were taken into effect and a different set of rules applied until they got everything under control.So to answer your question,NO ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!! The could not just start killing inmates just because.Only death row inmates are killed, after many many years of appeals and process.
What was the important factor in Rome's military success during the 300s?
law and legal issues
