Old Soldier
@oldsoldier999.bsky.social
2K followers
3.7K following
1.7K posts
"Do not rejoice in his defeat, you men. For though the world has stood up and stopped the bastard, the bitch that bore him is in heat again." - Bertolt Brecht
BS Business Admin
MS Cybersecurity
DLI/FLC Alum
ΦΚΦ
Pining for that downhill run to Papeʻetē.
Posts
Media
Videos
Starter Packs
Pinned
Old Soldier
@oldsoldier999.bsky.social
· Apr 21
Reposted by Old Soldier
Reposted by Old Soldier
Reposted by Old Soldier
Reposted by Old Soldier
Reposted by Old Soldier
Reposted by Old Soldier
DHS says our new piece is "dishonest, slanted, and fundamentally inaccurate" but won't say why. Here's the story where we show with evidence that DHS spliced together clips spanning years and multiple locations to create its own reality. Gift link wapo.st/4nuDGwf
Reposted by Old Soldier
Reposted by Old Soldier
Reposted by Old Soldier
Portland dance group offers free Latin dance lessons at ICE facility 💃🏽
Reposted by Old Soldier
Reposted by Old Soldier
Reposted by Old Soldier
I just read your delightful brief again, thank you. As a layman, this seems to be the relevant summary. bsky.app/profile/mart...
Reposted by Old Soldier
![It is important to emphasize, in that regard, that if neither § 253(2) nor any other legal
authority expressly empowers the President to use the “regular forces” in the military to help
enforce federal laws in Illinois, it would not follow that the precondition for calling forth the
National Guard pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 12406(3) would be satisfied here. It is difficult to
24
imagine that Congress intended to afford the President the ability to use the National Guard for
law-execution purposes in situations where he is “unable” to deploy the regular forces to do so
only in the sense that Congress has denied the President the authority to make such use of the
regular military. As far as amicus is aware, there is no basis for concluding that Congress
intended such a counterintuitive result. Indeed, there is evidence to the contrary: A cognate
provision, 10 U.S.C. § 12405, derived from Section 9 of the Dick Act, see Act of Jan. 21, 1903,
ch. 196, § 9, 32 Stat. at 776, provides that “[m]embers of the National Guard called into Federal
service are, from the time when they are required to respond to the call, subject to the laws and
regulations governing the Army or the Air Force, as the case may be, except those applicable
only to members of the Regular Army or Regular Air Force, as the case may be.” In other
words, Congress designed the militia calling-forth authority to enable the President to use
National Guard only in the same manner that he may make use of the regular military forces (and
only if and when those regular forces are unable to ensure sufficient execution of federal laws)—
not as a backdoor that would invite the militarization of law-execution in cases where Congress
has foreclosed the use of the standing Armed Forces themselves](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:cfk6dxcceavbfezwu2y5zb4g/bafkreien4mv3pnsbmc6xtc5i3y7zmswk7rkkm33k7ph3ihv6ebferut2zu@jpeg)
Reposted by Old Soldier
Reposted by Old Soldier
Reposted by Old Soldier
Reposted by Old Soldier
Reposted by Old Soldier
Reposted by Old Soldier
Reposted by Old Soldier
