Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Civil Military Relations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Members warn about domestic use of military, call for oversight after unclear Caribbean strike
Summary
During the Rules Committee hearing on HR 3838, members raised concerns about recent uses of the military for domestic law enforcement and an unexplained strike in the Caribbean, asking for White House briefings and clearer legal justification.
Several members of the House Rules Committee used the HR 3838 hearing on Oct. 10 to press witnesses on limits and oversight of the Department of Defense's use of force, both domestically and abroad.
"The posse committatus law is there for a reason," Representative Adam Smith, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, told the panel, arguing that using the military for domestic law enforcement and border operations risks undermining the military's core mission. "This is being valuable violated."
Representative Smith and others questioned the legal basis and notification surrounding a recent U.S. military strike in the Caribbean. "To begin with, to date, we have not received any sort of detailed explanation from the White House as to who the target was, what the intelligence was behind it, why the strike was taken," Smith said. He said a staff-level briefing was expected but had been delayed; members urged timely briefings to Congress.
Committee members also discussed the legal authorities that can justify strikes: longstanding Authorizations for Use of Military Force from 2001 and 2003, and the executive-branch concept of inherent self-defense under Article II. "If you don't have any of that, all you got left is Article II, which is the inherent right of self defense," Smith said, while cautioning that expanding the concept broadly to cover drug trafficking could authorize far-reaching military strikes.
Representative James McGovern, Rules Committee ranking member, echoed concerns about domestic deployments and the precedent they set, linking such actions to reductions in readiness and the need for careful oversight. Committee members urged more transparent briefings and expressed worry about mission creep if the military is used routinely for border security or law enforcement tasks.
No new legal findings or authorizations were adopted during the hearing; members requested additional briefings and encouraged oversight staff to review the strike and domestic mission use questions.
