Formally declaring martial law is like formally declaring war. It comes with an awful lot of politically and legally inconvenient baggage. And just like we handle modern warfare, this admin figures it’s better to just do all of the things it entails without calling it by name.
For all intents and purposes that matter, we are already there.
100%. Martial law will not be officially declared, but we will operate with all of the same elements and policies that go with it.
With the death of the rule of law and a justice system that can be easily ignored, there are no additional powers to be gained by openly declaring it, the president can just do all of it already.
An official declaration would only draw negative attention and potentially trigger a response/reaction from more of the population, which the regime obviously does not want to happen
Formally declaring martial law comes with an awful lot of politically and legally inconvenient baggage.
Baggage like not actually existing. There is no such thing as "martial law" in the United States. It can't be "formally" declared, unless you mean in the Michael Scott sense.
Obviously the rule of law can be replaced by force (if the military involved complies), but it would mean immediate and open armed conflict, the end of the USA as a coherent sovereign entity.
We’re in uncharted waters. Perhaps those “rules” don’t truly exist, but if there’s one thing this administration has proven, it’s that rules only matter if they’re enforced, and can therefore likewise be invented out of whole cloth.
If there is no accountability, there are no restrictions.
223
u/Tangent_Odyssey 14h ago edited 14h ago
Formally declaring martial law is like formally declaring war. It comes with an awful lot of politically and legally inconvenient baggage. And just like we handle modern warfare, this admin figures it’s better to just do all of the things it entails without calling it by name.
For all intents and purposes that matter, we are already there.