Thread: TX-OPINION: The U.S. military is not a law-enforcement agenc

OPINION: The U.S. military is not a law-enforcement agency

El Paso Times
By Ouisa D. Davis / Guest Columnist
Posted: 07/31/2009 12:00:00 AM MDT

Three years ago, state National Guard units were deployed to the southern U.S. border to support Border Patrol activities. After public outcry, the project was downplayed.

Now, the Department of Homeland Security is encouraging the use of the military to engage in federal law-enforcement activities.

The mission of the Army National Guard is to "maintain properly trained and equipped units, available for prompt mobilization for war, national emergency, or as otherwise needed."Ê

Now, before you run under your American flag and speak of the "noble contributions" of individual Guard members or sing the praises of the Guard in disaster relief, be very clear -- individual contributions or disaster-relief activities are not the issue.

The National Guard serves in two capacities -- on the state level and, if needed, under the direction of the federal government. When acting in its state mission, the National Guard can be mobilized by each state's governor to provide relief after natural disasters or other emergency situations.

But, the National Guard's primary role is to support the U.S. Army in military actions. Its secondary role, and one that gives us warm fuzzy feelings about this particular deployment plan, is civil relief. The federal government is deploying military units to the southern border to support federal law-enforcement activities.

And that is militarization of the border. The Second Amendment lovers should be up in arms.

The Army National Guard claims its origination in December 1636 when the Massachusetts Bay colony formed three citizen militia regiments to defend against the Pequot tribe. Its charter is found in the U.S. Constitution, specifically Article 1, Section 8, calling forth a militia "to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions."

Beginning in 1792, laws passed defining the separate roles of the regular Army, the Reserves and the National Guard. The National Defense Amendments of 1920 refined the role of the National Guard, organizing it into the support force we know today. By 1973, the Guard was mobilized as a constituent component of the U.S. Army.

The National Guard can be deployed by state governors to engage in state law-enforcement activities. However, border protection, immigration enforcement and drug interdiction are governed by federal, not state. law. I have found no legal authority permitting the federal government to deploy National Guard troops to support federal border-enforcement activities.

Why is the federal government utilizing the Guard in border law- enforcement activities?

Think critically for a moment -- we are not at war with Mexico, there is no civil unrest in our sleepy town, no foreign army has invaded the U.S. through our southern border, and there is no national disaster plaguing our community.

Federal agencies are unable to fill vacancies; that is the crux of the problem -- a recruitment issue, not a national security problem requiring the deployment of military troops in any capacity.

The military is not a police force. This is a quick-fix to a real problem -- the need for comprehensive immigration reform that not only includes border security measures but also realistic opportunities for people to immigrate to the U.S. safely and legally.

Ouisa D. Davis is an attorney at law in El Paso. E-mail: Ouisadavis@yahoo.com

http://www.elpasotimes.com/opinion/ci_12949166

Think critically for a moment -- we are not at war with Mexico, there is no civil unrest in our sleepy town, no foreign army has invaded the U.S. through our southern border, and there is no national disaster plaguing our community.

Yes, we are in the worse of WARS from globalist, elitist, third world countries, foreign governments, and of course the New World Order.

Ouisa D. Davis


Ouisa D. Davis is a 1985 graduate of the University of Texas at El Paso and graduated from the University of Denver College of Law in 1991. Licensed to practice law in the State of Texas, she was an Assistant County Attorney in El Paso, Texas focusing on domestic violence prevention, mental health, child and elder protection law practice from 1993-1997. Thereafter, she served as an attorney and the Executive Director of Diocesan Migrant & Refugee Services, Inc., an immigration legal aid clinic serving the indigent low income immigrant families within the Catholic Diocese of El Paso, Texas. In January 2006, she began employment with the El Paso County Domestic Relations Office, returning to a family focused law practice.

http://tsid.org/tsid2006/bios.php


Just another pro-illegal. Ignore her.

We ARE at war from Mexico by illegal invaders who seek to turn our country into another Mexico.

Thanks az. I was wondering what rock this woman has been under to say that there is no war with Mexico. That explains it all.

Davis is an immigration attorney in El Paso who supports illegal immigration and who does not support border enforcement

Originally Posted by vortex

Thanks az. I was wondering what rock this woman has been under to say that there is no war with Mexico. That explains it all.

You're welcome V.

Just one quick search on her was all it took to show her for what she is......a far left extremist who has found a platform with the El Paso Times from which to promote "the agenda" under the cover of "opinion" pieces.

A real busy bee (otch) seemingly emboldened by obama's election to crawl out from under her rock

Another "15 minuter" who's name no one will even remember.......<yawn>