Say No to Standing Military Force for Civil Unrest

Alarming Expansion of Federal Military Power I am writing to express deep concern over reports that the Trump administration plans to create a “Domestic Civil Disturbance Quick Reaction Force” - about 600 National Guard troops based in Alabama and Arizona, deployable to any U.S. city within an hour. This force could be used in protests, demonstrations, and other civic gatherings even when state or local officials have not requested assistance. Violation of Legal and Constitutional Safeguards This proposal marks a dangerous break from the National Guard’s traditional role. The Posse Comitatus Act sharply limits federal military involvement in domestic law enforcement, reserving primary policing authority to the states. The Insurrection Act allows exceptions only under extraordinary circumstances - not for a permanent federalized force dispatched at a president’s discretion. Such a standing force would undermine both the letter and spirit of these safeguards. Threats to Civil Liberties and Public Trust The risks to civil liberties are profound. Deploying military forces into civilian communities to address protests or perceived “disturbances” could chill free speech, discourage lawful assembly, and escalate tensions. History shows that broad and vague executive powers in this area are vulnerable to abuse, especially in politically charged situations. Federalizing such a force would also erode trust in the National Guard by blurring the line between military readiness and civilian policing. Urgent Actions for Congress I urge you to: 1. Speak out publicly to make clear that this proposal violates core constitutional principles and threatens fundamental rights. 2. Enact legislation prohibiting creation or use of any federal rapid-reaction National Guard force for domestic law enforcement unless authorized by Congress under narrowly defined conditions with clear limits. 3. Hold oversight hearings to question Defense Department and administration officials, and constitutional experts, on the legal, civil, and operational implications. Danger of a Militarized State Establishing this force would be a step toward a militarized state where political disagreements are met not with debate or negotiation, but with soldiers in the streets. It would blur the lines between democracy and autocracy, leaving future generations with fewer rights, less security, and diminished freedom.