Y Martial Law should be X out

Martial Law is UN-Constitutional as there is nothing in the Constitution that gives the President that power. According to the Department of Justice it “involves the temporary substitution of military authority for civilian rule” (DOJ). In short it redacts habeas corpus which is the law that gives everyone the right to a free and fair trial.

The New York Times printed an article recently speaking on Martial law and what that looks like in America. David French authored the opinion piece bravely, and he refers to the Korean example. He defers to the chaos that ensued and the way Parliament came in quickly to reverse it. The rush to reverse was due to the fear of the military ruling their country, and overwhelming the civilians. The enactment of martial law, shocked so many government employees and civilians. South Korea was thriving and having a time of stability and peace. They never would have thought that their leader would flip on a dime like that~ but he did. 

This is where the fear of it happening here comes into play. If it were enacted we would lose the right to protest, to free speech, and more rights we may not have known we had. The only reason it should be enacted is if it is the only way for the country to protect itself. The problem is that nobody knows when the pot is boiling or who gets to make that call. To clarify my analogy, a silly frog doesn’t know he is a frog stew till the bath gets too warm. We have already seen how this current administration handles foreign affairs… we don’t know what wrong move may make him think they’re after us. 

We’d be remiss if we didn't recognize Pete and his contribution to this matter. Pete being Pete Hegseth who is a drunk and has been sworn in as head of the DOJ. He also sexually assaulted women and co workers while he was drunk on the job. A great pick overall. What if Pete has one too many at lunch and by dinner we’re telling our soldier resident (4th Amendment gone) what we’re having? This guy is a posterboy for ‘boys will be boys’ and this argument leads to concerns about protections for women as well as the country.

Trump is very good at making people feel as though they need to be near him, so they’re safe. How many other states will follow suit with his fear when it comes to martial law? As V Under the Desk put it so perfectly, “Who gets to decide if there’s no choice? The people in power who want more power? Cool!” (Judicial Insanity, 3:36). My own congressional members in the great state of Tennessee have said they don’t care what constitutes want.This raises even more concerns when we know that a state itself can declare martial law.  


We know that martial law has been declared 68 times in the United States 249 (250 this 4th) years of living. That's a 27% rate of “failure” if this is only used in an emergency situation, where the military has total control. According to the Brennan Center of Justice, the majority of these emergency situations were labor disputes. There were 29 different times martial law was enacted just based on labor disputes.

This rolls into why it needs to be disbanded. If the majority of the time a country is calling a state of emergency on its own citizens and companies for labor disputes, then there is something wrong with the country calling them. This law is supposed to help protect the citizens of a country but it has historically proven to be used against them. The question isn’t why should we get rid of it, the question is why haven’t we yet?