Homeland Security

Militarizing Civilian Emergencies? Professor William C. Banks Interviewed for the NATO M4CE Project

Professor Emeritus William C. Banks recently was interviewed as part of the M4CE Project, an initiative of the NATO Foundation for Global Governance and Sustainability, on the subject of military intervention in domestic natural and man-made emergencies:

“At the Foundation for Global Governance and Sustainability (FOGGS) we appreciate the role that military personnel and equipment can play and have already been playing in areas struck by natural or human-made disasters ranging from pandemics, like the current COVID-19 one, to floods, forest fires, hurricanes, earthquakes, industrial accidents and oil spills. We believe that this role has to be highlighted for policy makers and the public, and can be further improved on the basis of best practices that need to be collected and shared broadly.”

THE M4CE PROJECT

European policy news organization Katoikos, summarizes the M4CE interviews at its blog:

The M4CE Project: Interviews with Key Experts on Militaries for Civilian Emergencies

“Finally, perhaps the most significant challenge ahead relates to perceptions, both in terms of public opinion towards military involvement in civilian emergencies, and in terms of the military’s opinion about working alongside civilian authorities. As both Dr. William Banks and Mr. David Burke remind us, those nations with a complicated history of military abuse of power may hold deeply embedded but well-founded mistrust towards the military. Mr. Nikos Votsios raises the important question of whether militaries can be “convinced that providing assistance to state services and local communities in case of emergencies and disasters is in their mission” or constitute a distraction from the armed forces’ “real tasks.”

Watch Professor Banks’ full M4CE Project interview:

“What We’ve Learned in the Two Decades Since 9/11”: Syracuse Led Podcast and JNSLP Special Issue

In anticipation of the 20th anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, the Institute for Security Policy and Law asked, How could we honor the memory of 9/11 and contribute to a greater good?

SPL Director the Hon. James E. Baker settled on a series of lessons-learned essays to be published in the Journal of National Security Law and Policy, drafted to inform the future rather than to adjudicate the past.

To lead this project, Baker asked Distinguished Fellow-in-Residence Matt Kronisch, who has joined SPL for 2021-2022 on secondment from the US Department of Homeland Security.

“Matt compiled a remarkable line-up of 20 authors, whose essays are clear, short, direct, and geared toward policy and legal implementation,” says Judge Baker. “They also represent a cross-section of practitioners and thought leaders.”

To announce the Special 9/11 Edition of JNSLP, SPL hosted a 9/11 Remembrance Webinar/Podcast in coordination with the ABA Standing Committee on Law and National Security with ABA President Reggie Tucker, followed by a conversation with Amb. Anne Patterson, former Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Michael Vickers, and Professor Sahar Aziz.

“A Specialized Society?” Professor Mark Nevitt Discusses Monitoring Military for Domestic Extremists in The Washington Post

The Pentagon wants to take a harder line on domestic extremism. How far can it go?

(The Washington Post | May 5, 2021) Pentagon officials are considering new restrictions on service members’ interactions with far-right groups, part of the military’s reckoning with extremism, but the measures could trigger legal challenges from critics who say they would violate First Amendment rights.

Under a review launched by Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Defense Department officials are reexamining rules governing troops’ affiliations with anti-government and white supremacist movements, ties that currently are permissible in limited circumstances.

Austin, who has pledged zero tolerance for extremism, ordered the review after the events of Jan. 6, when rioters including a few dozen veterans — and a handful of current service members — stormed the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to overturn the presidential election results …

… Mark Nevitt, a former Navy lawyer who teaches at the Syracuse University College of Law, pointed to other cases in which courts have characterized the military as a “specialized society separate from society.”

“Federal courts will likely provide a healthy dose of deference to the military if challenged, particularly if the military can link the new definition to the underlying military mission and good order and discipline,” he said …

Read the full article.

Emergency Powers and Policing: Professor William C. Banks Talks to Rewire

How Emergency Powers Pave the Way for Police Brutality at Protests

(Rewire | April 21, 2021) When curfew hit at 8 p.m. on April 13 in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, it felt like someone had flipped a switch.

Reporters on the ground say the protest outside the police department had been peaceful, full of speeches and songs.

But the environment quickly changed as law enforcement began to use more aggressive tactics, firing less-lethal rounds, tear gas and flash grenades at protesters in an attempt to disperse the protest …

… In 1878, The Posse Comitatus Act was passed to prevent the federal military from engaging in law enforcement activity. There was a desire for the military and law enforcement to be separate entities.

“They’re supposed to keep the peace, prevent disturbances, quell disorder, but not enforce the law. That’s for the cops,” said William Banks, professor emeritus at the Syracuse University College of Law.

But states aren’t burdened by that restriction.

“If the governor wishes, depending on how the state law is written, National Guard forces could enforce the curfew or engage in a search or make an arrest of an individual who’s violating the law,” Banks said.

In the past 20 years, the lines have further blurred. That’s because military-grade force doesn’t just come from the military.

Since 1997, federal programs have transferred surplus military equipment to local police departments. Police departments often respond to protests in full tactical military gear, with gas masks, shields and armored vehicles.

For instance, as NPR reported, St. Paul suburb Cottage Grove’s police department alone acquired $1 million in military gear during the Trump administration. The department received 39 bayonets in December 2019.

“That kind of a force, particularly if it’s made distant from the people by virtue of the equipment that they use and the paraphernalia that they wear, and the rules of engagement that follow, they’re no longer being responsive to the people,” Banks said …

Read the full article.

The Legal Examiner Talks to Professor William C. Banks About Domestic Terrorism Cases

Domestic terrorism prosecutions reach all-time high

(The Legal Examiner | Jan. 19, 2021) The insurrection attempt by a mob on the nation’s capitol may be part of a larger trend of increasing incidents of right-wing domestic terrorism.

“I think it’s not a one-off,” said William C. Banks, law professor at Syracuse University College of Law. “We’re in a very critical period right now that might even abate or reverse itself. I’m hopeful that it will. I think we’re going to have to see.”

Banks said he hopes the leadership of Joe Biden’s administration will have a “more calming effect” than President Trump.

Last year saw the highest number of domestic terrorism prosecutions brought by the federal government around the country in the 25 years since government tracking of these cases began, according to a report from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University. Banks is not affiliated with TRAC.

In all, U.S. Attorneys’ offices brought 183 domestic terrorism cases in 2020, compared with 90 in 2019, 63 in 2018 and 69 in 2017, according to the TRAC report, which used data the clearinghouse obtained through litigation …

Read the full article …

Domestic terrorism prosecutions reach all-time high

Professor William C. Banks Helps Explain Insurrection Act for USA Today

What is the Insurrection Act and how could Trump use it? Here’s what to know

(USA Today | Jan. 11, 2021) False social media posts swirled late Sunday that President Donald Trump in the wake of the U.S. Capitol riots had invoked the Insurrection Act, a law that allows the president to deploy the military to quell rebellion.

Tweets sharing images of military personnel in Washington continued to spread Monday morning and became a trending term on Twitter. However, Trump has not invoked the law.

The law, which has existed in various forms since the time of George Washington and in its current state since the Civil War, allows the president to dispatch the military or federalize the National Guard in states that are unable to put down an insurrection or are defying federal law …

… William Banks, a Syracuse University College of Law Board of Advisors Distinguished Professor, said that when thinking about the Insurrection Act, it’s important to remember one of the most basic principles of the United States’ founding: that the military not be involved in civilian affairs.

“The Insurrection Act lays into U.S. law an exception to that background principle,” Banks said.

In most cases, a state would want to rely on National Guard troops in situations of unrest. The Insurrection Act is generally reserved for when “things are really bad,” Banks said …

… Hoffmeister and Banks said, however, there was no need for Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act on Jan. 6. given the federal government’s control of the district’s National Guard and federal law enforcement. Invoking the Act would have further allowed Trump to send active-duty military to the district when he already in effect had control over its National Guard and federal police …

Read the full article.

 

NBC News Asks Professor William C. Banks About National Guard and Protests

Who decides when there are helicopters? Experts weigh in on National Guard monitoring protests

(NBC News | Jan. 10, 2020) It was not lost on many Americans — including President-elect Joe Biden — that after a violent mob of President Donald Trump’s supporters broke into the Capitol in Washington, D.C., the delayed use of National Guard troops was far different than it was during the Black Lives Matter protests last year.

In late May, governors called on 43,000 troops nationwide. The nation hasn’t deployed National Guard troops at a comparable scale since the civil rights movement of the 1960s. By comparison, on Wednesday, acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller approved the deployment of less than 6,200 National Guard troops …

… But the use of National Guard units in June was “fundamentally exceptional and different from the way civilians and the military have ordinarily worked together,” said William Banks, emeritus professor of law at Syracuse University and co-author of “Soldiers on the Home Front,” a book about the domestic deployment of U.S. military assets. He fears that the new use of military surveillance technology for domestic protesters presents deeply troubling implications. “The civilian-military relationship, which is critical to the success of our society, has broken down” …

Read the full article.

 

Professor Mark Nevitt Asks Four Questions About Capitol Hill Riot

Tragedy at the Capitol: Four Questions that Demand Answers

By Mark P. Nevitt

(Just Security | Jan. 9, 2020) How can the U.S. Capitol, surrounded by one of the largest concentrations of law enforcement and national security personnel in the world, be so quickly overrun by Trump insurrectionists hell-bent on “stopping the steal,” halting our cherished democratic processes, and potentially harming lawmakers?

This tragedy and breach of the Capitol Building on Wednesday is a failure of leadership and planning at the highest levels. A full and comprehensive investigation will be conducted. And it is important not to jump too quickly to conclusions without having a full understanding of the events and decisions that took place that day and the days leading up to it.

Nevertheless, several key questions and themes are beginning to emerge. These must be addressed prior to President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration on Jan. 20.

These questions center around the difficulty in swiftly coordinating a response across overlapping federal, state, and local jurisdictions. Despite being surrounded by the nation’s vast national security and law enforcement apparatus, the U.S. Capitol response appears to have been plagued by and not taking the threat of right-wing extremism seriously. This was further exacerbated by different chains of command, overlapping legal authorities, and complex jurisdictional issue.

I highlight four initial questions to focus on:

  1. Was the District of Columbia National Guard properly deployed and resourced?
  2. What prevented other state National Guards from being expeditiously deployed?
  3. What role do other federal law enforcement have and why did the DC police have to play such a critical role in the Capitol’s defense?
  4. What other assets may have assisted? …

Tragedy at the Capitol: Four Questions that Demand Answers

Professor William C. Banks Comments on the Capitol Hill Riot

SU Law Professor Saddened, Concerned About Democracy’s Future

(Spectrum News | Jan. 7, 2021) Sadness: That’s how Syracuse University Law Professor Bill Banks felt when he watched a mob rush the Capitol on Wednesday. A group of people took extreme measures to vindicate a president who refuses to accept defeat, he said.

“It’s quite an ironic and disturbing spectacle to have the president of the United States engage in sedition.”

“It’s quite an ironic and disturbing spectacle to have the president of the United States engage in sedition,” said Banks. “That is in violent, illegal attempts to overthrow the government of the United States.”

Capitol police were overwhelmed Wednesday afternoon. The logistics are still unknown.

Law enforcement in Washington, D.C., is unique because the Defense Department usurps the city’s power, said Banks. He says either the police misapprehended where the group was or they were underprepared.

“They simply didn’t have the numbers to stand up to the thousands of violent thugs who were using any means available to them to break into the building,” said Banks …

Read the full article.

CNY Reactions to Washington D.C. Attack on Congress from Disgust to Anger to Blaming Trump

(WAER | Jan. 7, 2021) Reactions to the storming of the U.S. Capitol building by a large number of President Trump supporters Wednesday sparked some strong reactions from New York’s Congressional delegation and political experts in Central New York …

Syracuse University Professor William Banks, founder of the Institute for Security Policy and Law says the mob and its activities fall short of a coup attempt, though said it was appropriate for police to use force to quell rioting …

Read the full story.

 

Preparedness, Planning, and Leadership: Professor William C. Banks Looks at Lessons Learned in 2020

Hope jostles with fear in US

(China Daily | Jan. 5. 2021) New leader on way, but wounds could take time to heal in polarized nation

The year 2020 has passed into history with a series of cascading events in the United States ranging from racism protests to a traumatic presidential election－all played out against the backdrop of a deadly pandemic.

The past year will make itself felt in 2021 as a more divided country grapples with twin health and economic crises.

The US casualties from the novel coronavirus, which the nation’s scientists now believe first infected people there in mid-December 2019, had surged past 351,000 on the first days of 2021. That’s roughly one of every 1,000 residents, the most in the world for a single nation.

But the pandemic wasn’t the only event that shaped the year.

William Banks, distinguished professor emeritus at Syracuse University College of Law in New York, summed up 2020 in three phrases: COVID-19, racial justice and democracy threatened.

The pandemic will mark 2020 as equivalent to 1918, when a similar pandemic killed huge numbers of people, Banks said.

“The lessons learned hopefully are preparedness, planning, and leadership,” he told China Daily. “The US lacked all three this year” …

Read the full article.