1. United States
2. Mass.
3. Letter

The proposal to potentially invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807 raises grave concerns about an overreach of executive power and the militarization of domestic affairs. This archaic law, enacted over two centuries ago, grants the president sweeping authority to deploy military forces within the United States, essentially imposing martial law. Resorting to such an extreme measure in the context of immigration enforcement would be a dangerous precedent that undermines civil liberties and the separation of powers. Throughout history, the Insurrection Act has been used sparingly and only during times of severe civil unrest, such as the 1992 Los Angeles riots. Employing it as a means to address challenges at the southern border would be an unprecedented and likely unconstitutional expansion of presidential authority. Immigration is a complex issue that demands thoughtful policy solutions, not heavy-handed military intervention. There are already robust civilian law enforcement resources dedicated to border security and immigration matters. Introducing military forces into this arena could lead to escalated tensions, human rights violations, and a further erosion of public trust in government institutions. It is paramount that we pursue comprehensive immigration reform through proper legislative channels, not unilateral executive action that flouts constitutional checks and balances. I urge you to press the administration to categorically reject any recommendations to invoke the Insurrection Act in this context. Doing so would be a severe overreaction that jeopardizes fundamental American values of democracy, freedom, and due process of law. We must chart a more judicious path forward on immigration that respects human rights and the rule of law.