1. United States
2. Maine
3. Letter

I’m writing as your constituent and an Army veteran to urge you to oppose—and actively constrain—the use of federal forces for broad, show-of-force deployments in U.S. cities and towns. In a constitutional democracy, public order is maintained primarily by accountable, civilian law enforcement under local and state authority. When the federal government mass-deploys armed agents or troops into American communities absent a clearly defined, genuine emergency, it damages public trust, chills lawful speech and assembly, and erodes the principle that the government answers to the people—not the other way around. I’m also concerned by the growing practice of allowing deployed personnel to conceal their identities—for example through masks, lack of clearly visible name/identifier, or obscured agency markings. In ordinary domestic law enforcement, the public has a right to know who is exercising coercive power in their community. When agents are anonymous, accountability weakens, bad actors are emboldened, lawful observers are chilled, and it becomes harder to investigate misconduct or even verify lawful authority. I’m especially concerned by the normalization of using federal law enforcement and/or military forces as a political instrument. When deployments appear concentrated in jurisdictions governed by the opposing party, it creates the unmistakable perception of selective enforcement and partisan intimidation. That perception alone is corrosive; if it is true, it is unacceptable. Congress has clear responsibilities here. I ask you to: 1. Demand transparency and oversight: require timely public reporting of mission objectives, legal authority, rules of engagement/use-of-force guidance, coordination with local officials, costs, and after-action results for any significant federal deployments. 2. Require clear identification and accountability: mandate visible agency insignia and unique, readable identifiers for personnel engaged in domestic operations, and prohibit masking or identity concealment except for narrowly defined safety needs (with supervisory approval and documented justification). 3. Reinforce legal guardrails: strengthen statutory limits consistent with the Posse Comitatus tradition, and narrow/clarify circumstances for invoking extraordinary authorities such as the Insurrection Act so they cannot be stretched into routine governance. 4. Protect constitutional rights: ensure federal operations do not chill First Amendment activity or invite unlawful stops, detentions, or surveillance of lawful protest and civic monitoring. 5. Require accountability: independent investigation and meaningful consequences for misconduct, including preventable escalation and misuse of force. I served in support of the Constitution and the rule of law. Using federal power to create fear, score political points, or substitute for local governance is un-American and dangerous. Please publicly oppose these tactics and support concrete legislative constraints and oversight.