Martial Law: Can A President Take This Step?

The question of whether a president can enact martial law is complex and not easily answered. Martial law occurs when the military assumes temporary control over various civilian authorities, and it has been declared nine times since World War II. While the Constitution does not define or specify who can declare martial law, several presidents and state governors have imposed or approved declarations of martial law throughout American history. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 prevents the US military from participating in civilian law enforcement activities without congressional approval, and the Insurrection Act of 1807 allows the president to deploy military forces to put down rebellions and enforce the law in specific situations. The Supreme Court has ruled that states can declare martial law, but it has never explicitly held that the president can, leaving the president's authority to declare martial law uncertain.

The Posse Comitatus Act and Insurrection Act

The Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act are two federal laws that impact the president's ability to declare martial law. The Posse Comitatus Act was enacted by Congress in 1878 following Reconstruction and prevents the US military from participating in civilian law enforcement activities. The Insurrection Act of 1807, on the other hand, allows the president to deploy military forces to put down rebellions within the United States and assist local law enforcement in dealing with domestic violence. It also empowers the president to deploy troops to enforce the law in specific situations.

The Posse Comitatus Act embodies a long-standing American tradition that views military interference in civilian affairs as a threat to democracy and personal liberty. The law prohibits the use of the military as a domestic police force and bars federal troops from participating in civilian law enforcement unless expressly authorised by law. The Act strengthens the separation of powers between Congress and the president and bolsters federalism, which divides power between federal and state governments.

The Insurrection Act, however, provides the president with significant power to decide when and where to deploy the US military within the country. It allows the president, with or without the state government's consent, to use the military to enforce federal law, suppress rebellions, or protect civil rights when the state government is unable or unwilling to do so. The Act is intended to be invoked only in crises that are beyond the capacity of civilian authorities to manage. Nevertheless, the Insurrection Act has been criticised for its vague language and lack of clear definitions or limitations, leaving it open to interpretation and potential misuse.

While the Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act address the deployment of the military within the United States, they do not explicitly address the declaration of martial law. The Constitution does not define martial law, and it is unclear whether the president has the legal authority to declare it. The Supreme Court has held that states can declare martial law, but it has never specifically ruled that the president has the same power. As a result, the exact scope and limits of martial law remain uncertain until new laws are enacted to better define them.

Martial law and the suspension of habeas corpus

Martial law in the United States refers to instances when a region, state, city, or the entire nation is placed under the temporary control of a military body. This occurs when civilian authority over an area has stopped functioning, such as during an insurrection or natural disaster.

The Constitution does not define martial law, nor does it specify who can declare it. While the Supreme Court has held that states can declare martial law, it has never explicitly held that the president can. The Posse Comitatus Act, enacted in 1878, prevents the US military from participating in civilian law enforcement activities, further complicating the legality of martial law. However, the Insurrection Act of 1807 allows the president to deploy military forces to suppress rebellions and assist local law enforcement.

Despite the legal ambiguity, several presidents throughout history have imposed or approved declarations of martial law. On September 15, 1863, President Lincoln imposed Congressionally authorized martial law on Kentucky, Maryland, and Missouri. He also suspended habeas corpus, the right of any person under arrest to appear before a court to ensure they have not been falsely accused. This suspension was challenged in Ex parte Milligan, and the Supreme Court ruled that Lincoln's imposition of martial law by suspending habeas corpus was unconstitutional in areas where local courts were still operational.

The suspension of habeas corpus is a separate concept from martial law. While they may occur simultaneously, the suspension of habeas corpus does not imply an unusual role for the armed forces. The US Constitution protects the right to habeas corpus in Article I, Section 9, stating that it may only be suspended in cases of rebellion or invasion when public safety is at risk.

In summary, while the president has extensive authority to deploy the military domestically, the legality of declaring martial law is unclear. The suspension of habeas corpus, which has occurred alongside martial law in the past, is a distinct concept that allows the government to detain individuals without charge.

The US Constitution and martial law

The US Constitution does not define martial law, nor does it specify who can declare it. The Constitution gives Congress the authority to regulate the deployment of the military domestically, and while Congress has enacted legislation in this area, it does not include authorization for the president to impose martial law. Therefore, the president does not have the power to declare martial law.

However, the Insurrection Act of 1807 allows the president to deploy military forces to suppress rebellions within the United States and aid local law enforcement in dealing with civil disturbances. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which prevents the US military from participating in civilian law enforcement activities without congressional approval, is the primary exception to this.

The Supreme Court has held that states can declare martial law, and several state governors have done so throughout history. However, the Court has never explicitly held that the president can declare martial law, and the exact scope and limits of martial law remain unclear. The ability to suspend habeas corpus is related to the imposition of martial law, and Article 1, Section 9 of the US Constitution addresses this, stating that the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended unless in cases of rebellion or invasion where public safety requires it.

While the president is the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces, this power is derived from the Constitution, and neither it nor federal law explicitly authorizes the president to declare martial law. Although several presidents throughout history have imposed or approved declarations of martial law, it is unclear whether they had the legal authority to do so.

State governors and martial law

The US Constitution does not define martial law, nor does it specify who can declare it. However, throughout history, several US presidents and many state governors have imposed or approved declarations of martial law.

State governors have the power to declare martial law whenever it is authorized by state law, and federal courts are likely to defer to a state governor's decision that doing so was necessary. The Supreme Court has held that states can declare martial law, and the state martial law power is more clearly established than the president's. However, there are significant limits to state power in this area. The Constitution and valid federal laws will still constrain states' conduct under the declaration, and judicial review will be available in federal court.

The exact scope and limits of martial law remain unclear due to sparse and inconsistent Supreme Court precedent and a lack of legislation specifically addressing it. This uncertainty leaves room for competing interpretations and disputes by executive officials seeking to deploy military forces aggressively.

The last time martial law was declared at the state level was in 1963, when Maryland Governor J. Millard Tawes imposed it on the city of Cambridge for over a year in response to clashes between racial justice advocates and segregationists.

The Supreme Court and martial law

The Supreme Court has never explicitly ruled that the President or federal government can declare martial law. The Constitution does not define martial law and does not specify who can declare it. While the Supreme Court has held that states can declare martial law, it has never specifically held that the President can.

In 1849, the Supreme Court approved the state of Rhode Island's declaration of martial law in Luther v. Borden. Chief Justice Roger Taney wrote that states had an inherent right to declare martial law to defend themselves and promote public safety. The Court's ruling endorsed the constitutionality of martial law. However, this decision did not address the legal basis for martial law or whether the President could unilaterally declare it.

In 1866, the Supreme Court ruled in Ex parte Milligan that President Lincoln's imposition of martial law by suspending habeas corpus was unconstitutional in areas where local courts were still operational. This case demonstrated that the Supreme Court can review and overturn declarations of martial law if they violate constitutional rights.

The law governing martial law remains complicated and unsettled. The Supreme Court's rulings on the limits of executive power suggest that any declaration of martial law by the President would have to be within the bounds of the Constitution and subject to judicial review. However, the exact scope and limits of martial law are unclear due to sparse and inconsistent precedents.

While the President has the authority to deploy the military domestically to assist in law enforcement, this falls short of granting them the power to declare martial law. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 prevents the US military from participating in civilian law enforcement activities without congressional approval. The Insurrection Act of 1807 allows the President to deploy the military to address rebellions and support local law enforcement, but it does not explicitly authorise martial law.

Frequently asked questions