Connect with us

News

Trump hints at expanded role for the military within the US. A legacy law gives him few guardrails

Published

on

Trump hints at expanded role for the military within the US. A legacy law gives him few guardrails

WASHINGTON (AP) — Campaigning in Iowa this year, Donald Trump said he was prevented during his presidency from using the military to quell violence in primarily Democratic cities and states.

Calling New York City and Chicago “crime dens,” the front-runner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination told his audience, “The next time, I’m not waiting. One of the things I did was let them run it and we’re going to show how bad a job they do,” he said. “Well, we did that. We don’t have to wait any longer.”

Trump has not spelled out precisely how he might use the military during a second term, although he and his advisers have suggested they would have wide latitude to call up units. While deploying the military regularly within the country’s borders would be a departure from tradition, the former president already has signaled an aggressive agenda if he wins, from mass deportations to travel bans imposed on certain Muslim-majority countries.

A law first crafted in the nation’s infancy would give Trump as commander in chief almost unfettered power to do so, military and legal experts said in a series of interviews.

The Insurrection Act allows presidents to call on reserve or active-duty military units to respond to unrest in the states, an authority that is not reviewable by the courts. One of its few guardrails merely requires the president to request that the participants disperse.

Advertisement

“The principal constraint on the president’s use of the Insurrection Act is basically political, that presidents don’t want to be the guy who sent tanks rolling down Main Street,” said Joseph Nunn, a national security expert with the Brennan Center for Justice. “There’s not much really in the law to stay the president’s hand.”

A spokesman for Trump’s campaign did not respond to multiple requests for comment about what authority Trump might use to pursue his plans.

Congress passed the act in 1792, just four years after the Constitution was ratified. Nunn said it’s an amalgamation of different statutes enacted between then and the 1870s, a time when there was little in the way of local law enforcement.

“It is a law that in many ways was created for a country that doesn’t exist anymore,” he said.

It also is one of the most substantial exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally prohibits using the military for law enforcement purposes.

Advertisement

Trump has spoken openly about his plans should he win the presidency, including using the military at the border and in cities struggling with violent crime. His plans also have included using the military against foreign drug cartels, a view echoed by other Republican primary candidates such as Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley, the former U.N. ambassador and South Carolina governor.

The threats have raised questions about the meaning of military oaths, presidential power and who Trump could appoint to support his approach.

Trump already has suggested he might bring back retired Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, who served briefly as Trump’s national security adviser and twice pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI during its Russian influence probe before being pardoned by Trump. Flynn suggested in the aftermath of the 2020 election that Trump could seize voting machines and order the military in some states to help rerun the election.

Attempts to invoke the Insurrection Act and use the military for domestic policing would likely elicit pushback from the Pentagon, where the new chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is Gen. Charles Q. Brown. He was one of the eight members of the Joint Chiefs who signed a memo to military personnel in the aftermath of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. The memo emphasized the oaths they took and called the events of that day, which were intended to stop certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s victory over Trump, “sedition and insurrection.”

Trump and his party nevertheless retain wide support among those who have served in the military. AP VoteCast, an in-depth survey of more than 94,000 voters nationwide, showed that 59% of U.S. military veterans voted for Trump in the 2020 presidential election. In the 2022 midterms, 57% of military veterans supported Republican candidates.

Advertisement

Presidents have issued a total of 40 proclamations invoking the law, some of those done multiple times for the same crisis, Nunn said. Lyndon Johnson invoked it three times — in Baltimore, Chicago and Washington — in response to the unrest in cities after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968.

During the Civil Rights era, Presidents Johnson, John F. Kennedy and Dwight Eisenhower used the law to protect activists and students desegregating schools. Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne to Little Rock, Arkansas, to protect Black students integrating Central High School after that state’s governor activated the National Guard to keep the students out.

George H.W. Bush was the last president to use the Insurrection Act, a response to riots in Los Angeles in 1992 after the acquittal of the white police officers who beat Black motorist Rodney King in an incident that was videotaped.

Repeated attempts to invoke the act in a new Trump presidency could put pressure on military leaders, who could face consequences for their actions even if done at the direction of the president.

Michael O’Hanlon, director of research in foreign policy at the Brookings Institution think tank, said the question is whether the military is being imaginative enough with the scenarios it has been presenting to future officers. Ambiguity, especially when force is involved, is not something military personnel are comfortable with, he said.

Advertisement

“There are a lot of institutional checks and balances in our country that are pretty well-developed legally, and it’ll make it hard for a president to just do something randomly out of the blue,” said O’Hanlon, who specializes in U.S. defense strategy and the use of military force. “But Trump is good at developing a semi-logical train of thought that might lead to a place where there’s enough mayhem, there’s enough violence and legal murkiness” to call in the military.

Democratic Rep. Pat Ryan of New York, the first graduate of the U.S. Military Academy to represent the congressional district that includes West Point, said he took the oath three times while he was at the school and additional times during his military career. He said there was extensive classroom focus on an officer’s responsibilities to the Constitution and the people under his or her command.

“They really hammer into us the seriousness of the oath and who it was to, and who it wasn’t to,” he said.

Ryan said he thought it was universally understood, but Jan. 6 “was deeply disturbing and a wakeup call for me.” Several veterans and active-duty military personnel were charged with crimes in connection with the assault.

While those connections were troubling, he said he thinks those who harbor similar sentiments make up a very small percentage of the military.

Advertisement

William Banks, a Syracuse University law professor and expert in national security law, said a military officer is not forced to follow “unlawful orders.” That could create a difficult situation for leaders whose units are called on for domestic policing, since they can face charges for taking unlawful actions.

“But there is a big thumb on the scale in favor of the president’s interpretation of whether the order is lawful,” Banks said. “You’d have a really big row to hoe and you would have a big fuss inside the military if you chose not to follow a presidential order.”

Nunn, who has suggested steps to restrict the invocation of the law, said military personnel cannot be ordered to break the law.

“Members of the military are legally obliged to disobey an unlawful order. At the same time, that is a lot to ask of the military because they are also obliged to obey orders,” he said. “And the punishment for disobeying an order that turns out to be lawful is your career is over, and you may well be going to jail for a very long time. The stakes for them are extraordinarily high.”

___

Associated Press writers Jill Colvin and Michelle L. Price in New York, and Linley Sanders in Washington contributed to this report.

Advertisement

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

News

Where Trump Gained and Harris Lost in New York

Published

on

Where Trump Gained and Harris Lost in New York

Where each candidate gained
or lost votes compared with the party’s 2020 candidate, by
borough

Donald J. Trump won 30 percent of the votes cast in New York City this month. It was a seven-point jump from his performance in 2020, and a higher share of the vote than any Republican nominee has won in the city since George H.W. Bush in 1988.

But his improved vote share was driven more by the votes Democrats lost than by the votes he gained.

How votes changed since 2020

In every neighborhood in New York City, from Red Hook in Brooklyn to Riverdale in the Bronx, Vice President Kamala Harris received markedly fewer votes than Joseph R. Biden, Jr. did in 2020, while in most neighborhoods, Mr. Trump notched modest increases compared with his last run.

The votes cast in New York City have not yet been certified, but more than 97 percent of them have been counted. That includes all ballots that were cast in person, both on Election Day and before, and a majority of absentee ballots, according to Vincent M. Ignizio, the deputy executive director of the city’s election board.

As it stands, the downturn in votes for the Democratic candidate was six times the size of Mr. Trump’s gains when compared with 2020. In some boroughs, the ratio was even larger.

Change in vote by borough, compared with 2020

Advertisement
All of New York City

−573,600

+94,600

Queens

−164,900

+35,400

Brooklyn

−151,700

Advertisement

+16,600

Manhattan

−120,900

+17,900

Bronx

−111,000

+23,800

Advertisement
Staten Island

−25,100

+900

Many New Yorkers moved out of the city during the pandemic, and by the 2022 midterms, the total number of registered voters here had already started to drop. As of this month, there were about 230,000 fewer active registered Democrats in the city than there were in 2020, and about 12,000 more registered Republicans.

It is not clear how much that contributed to the outcome of the election, but the pattern of Democratic losses and Republican gains was clear across all income levels and ethnic groups in the city. The drop-off was most pronounced among working-class immigrant groups who live outside Manhattan, many of them in the neighborhoods that were hit the hardest by the pandemic and the economic disruption that followed.

The neighborhood where Democratic turnout dropped the most in terms of percentage change was Borough Park, an Orthodox Jewish enclave in Brooklyn that voted overwhelmingly for Mr. Trump. While support for Mr. Trump increased only slightly, from about 22,200 votes in 2020 to 22,700 in 2024, turnout for the Democratic candidate dropped 46 percent, from about 7,600 votes in 2020 to about 4,100 in 2024.

Advertisement

Where Democratic support declined the most

Percentage change in votes compared with 2020

Borough Park, Brooklyn

−46%

+2%

Woodhaven, Queens

−42%

Advertisement

+46%

Bensonhurst, Brooklyn

−40%

+12%

Corona, Queens

−40%

+57%

Advertisement
Richmond Hill, Queens

−39%

+35%

Ocean Parkway, Brooklyn

−39%

+1%

Elmhurst, Queens

−38%

Advertisement

+30%

Gravesend, Brooklyn

−37%

+13%

Flushing, Queens

−36%

+11%

Advertisement
Dyker Heights, Brooklyn

−36%

+9%

Morrisania, Bronx

−36%

+62%

East Tremont, Bronx

−36%

Advertisement

+57%

East Harlem, Manhattan

−36%

+26%

South Richmond Hill, Queens

−36%

+49%

Advertisement
Concourse, Bronx

−35%

+58%

Note: Data includes neighborhoods that had 10,000 votes or more in 2024.

Among income groups in the city, the precincts with the lowest median incomes saw a the largest drop in support for the Democratic candidate, and the largest increase in support for Mr. Trump.

Advertisement

Percentage change in votes compared with 2020

Lowest income

−32%

+24%

Middle income

−26%

+12%

Advertisement
Highest income

−17%

+7%

Note: The lowest income areas have a median income in the bottom 25 percent of all precincts; middle income areas have a median income in the middle 50 percent of all precincts; and highest income areas have a median income in the top 25 percent of all precincts.

Ms. Harris lost substantial support in precincts with larger populations of Latino and Asian voters. Asian voters have been shifting rightward in recent years because of a mix of concerns about crime, city education policies and the economy.

Advertisement

Mr. Trump made significant gains in precincts where a majority of residents were Latino or Black.

Percentage change in votes compared with 2020

45% Asian

−37%

+19%

70% Hispanic

−37%

Advertisement

+55%

70% Black

−21%

+46%

90% white

−18%

−2%

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Northvolt chief resigns a day after battery maker collapses into bankruptcy

Published

on

Northvolt chief resigns a day after battery maker collapses into bankruptcy

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Northvolt’s chief executive has resigned a day after Europe’s big battery hope filed for bankruptcy in the US.

Peter Carlsson took responsibility for the dramatic collapse during a town-hall meeting with employees on Friday morning, the Stockholm-based company said.

Northvolt was Europe’s best-funded start-up, having raised more than $15bn from investors and governments, but was left with just $30mn in cash — enough to operate for a week — before its bankruptcy filing under US Chapter 11 rules that gives it protection from creditors.

Advertisement

“The Chapter 11 filing allows a period during which the company can be reorganised, ramp up operations while honouring customer and supplier commitments, and ultimately position itself for the long term. That makes it a good time for me to hand over to the next generation of leaders,” Carlsson said.

He later told reporters that Northvolt needed about $1bn-$1.2bn to be able to continue as a going concern after Chapter 11.

The former Tesla executive founded Northvolt in 2016 and positioned it as Europe’s answer to the growing dominance of Asian players in battery manufacturing such as China’s CATL and BYD, Japan’s Panasonic and South Korea’s LG and Samsung.

Northvolt gathered more than $50bn in orders from automotive groups such as Volkswagen, BMW, Scania and Porsche as well as billions more in capital from the same groups and from financial investors including Goldman Sachs and BlackRock.

But it said late on Thursday that it was filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the US with $5.8bn in debts, so that it could access $145mn in cash and $100mn in fresh financing from truckmaker Scania. It is now looking for one or more investors to provide it with future financing to exit Chapter 11.

Advertisement

Current and former employees have told the Financial Times that the fall of Northvolt was due to a litany of issues, from mismanagement and overspending to poor safety standards and over-reliance on Chinese machinery.

Several investors had privately urged Carlsson to resign to take responsibility for Northvolt’s dramatic fall from grace.

Speaking to reporters on Friday about what went wrong, Carlsson said: “I should have pulled the brakes earlier on the expansion path to make sure the core engine was moving according to plan.” He also said there had been “gravel in the machinery”.

VW, Northvolt’s biggest current shareholder with a 21 per cent stake, had told the start-up that “they’re not able to continue capitalising us”, Carlsson continued. But he also said that the company had received strong support from Scania, Porsche and Audi, which are all part of the VW group.

Northvolt has struggled to ramp up production at its sole factory in Skellefteå, just below the Arctic Circle in northern Sweden.

Advertisement

Its plans for factories in Germany and Canada remain unaffected by Chapter 11 as they have received significant subsidies from the respective governments.

“We are incredibly thankful to Peter for his vision and dedication to building Northvolt from an unprecedented idea to becoming Europe’s battery manufacturing champion,” said Tom Johnstone, Northvolt’s interim chair.

The company will begin searching for a new chief executive immediately.

Its present leadership consists of Pia Aaltonen-Forsell, chief financial officer; Matthias Arleth, a former VW executive who is now head of cells and who will also take the role of chief operations officer; and Scott Millar, an executive at Teneo who has become chief restructuring officer.

Carlsson, currently one of Northvolt’s largest shareholders, will remain on the company’s board and as a senior adviser.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

You can sword-fight at this club. But no politics allowed

Published

on

You can sword-fight at this club. But no politics allowed

Gaia Ferrency, 17, of Swissvale, Pa., waits to participate in a long-sword tournament as part of Friday Night Fights, hosted by Pittsburgh Sword Fighters, on Oct. 4 at a former Catholic church northeast of Pittsburgh.

Justin Merriman for NPR/‎


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Justin Merriman for NPR/‎

Over the last few years and through this year’s contentious campaign season, which was rooted in America’s deep divisions, there has been a coarsening in the way people talk to each other. We wanted to explore how some are trying to bridge divides. We asked our reporters across the NPR Network to look for examples of people working through their differences. We’re sharing those stories in our series Seeking Common Ground.

CREIGHTON, Pa. — With their faces hidden behind hard black masks, two fighters stand a few feet apart and raise their swords.

They step forward and clank the broad, dull metal blades against each other repeatedly. One fighter strikes the other in the chest. The fight is over, and a small crowd applauds.

Advertisement

Inside this former Catholic church northeast of Pittsburgh, under a 25-foot ceiling flanked by Gothic, pointed-arch windows, members of the Pittsburgh Sword Fighters club and school gather.

In this photo, two sword fighters, wearing all black and protective gear, fight against one another with long metal swords. In the background, audience members watch them compete in the tournament.

The audience cheers on two sword fighters as they take part in a long-sword tournament hosted by Pittsburgh Sword Fighters.

Justin Merriman for NPR


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Justin Merriman for NPR

It’s a tournament — as well as a party — billed as Friday Night Fights.

There are plenty of rules in a sword fight. But there’s one rule that applies after the fighters have put down their weapons: no talk of politics.

The evolution of the rule started around 2016, when club owner Josh Parise says he was getting fed up with the rancor of political discourse in the U.S. — personal attacks were on the rise, even within families, as was cancel culture.

Advertisement

“I couldn’t tolerate the lack of decency between human beings,” says Parise, whose club focuses on historical European martial arts.

“None of it made sense anymore,” he says.

This photo is a portrait of Josh Parise. The photo shows him from the waist up, and he's wearing a gray shirt with an unbuttoned horizontal-striped shirt on top of it.

Josh Parise, 48, of Oakmont, Pa., is the owner of Pittsburgh Sword Fighters.

Justin Merriman for NPR


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Justin Merriman for NPR

And then there were a few would-be sword fighters who came to the club and didn’t treat others well. Parise had to tell them to get on their horses and leave.

“It’s infuriating to me, so with this place, we just don’t allow that to happen,” Parise says.

Advertisement

Leaving their politics at the door

As club volunteer Kat Licause watches the matches, she says the directive to avoid politics has led to closer relationships in the club.

“I don’t think we avoid it in the sense that we’re running scared of big questions and topics,” says Licause, who works as a tech writer. “I think we just have this mutual understanding here that if any of us was ever in trouble, we would pick each other up, like immediately.”

The club space is outfitted with medieval and Gothic touches, like coats of arms, a three-eyed raven sculpture and faux stonework that Parise made himself.

Chuck Gross stands in the doorway of the former Catholic church. He's wearing a dark tank top and has a long beard. Taxidermic animals with antlers are mounted on the wall above and around him. A teenage girl or young woman is to the left of him in the doorway.

Chuck Gross, one of the head long-sword instructors at Pittsburgh Sword Fighters, stands in the doorway of the former Catholic church where a long-sword tournament will take place.

Justin Merriman for NPR


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Justin Merriman for NPR

Against the far wall, a custom Dumbledore throne sits on a fake altar. Off to the sides, there’s a table for potluck dishes and an open bar. The crowd and the vibe are noticeably chill, considering the main activity.

Advertisement

“You walk up, you acknowledge one another, and then you hit each other with big metal sticks,” Parise says with a wry smile.

But divisive political rhetoric, which can be sharper than the swords here, must be left at the club’s big wooden door. The politics ban doesn’t rise to the level of, say, a 15th-century heresy law, but it’s there.

Parise says his students and club members run the gamut politically, from religious conservatives to progressives. He loves to see them find common ground.

“I just don’t want people to feel uncomfortable, but I also don’t want them to bring their baggage with them,” he says. “Leave it outside and just do the thing.”

Teaching and learning from fellow fighters

As the tournament gets underway, a judge briefs the fighters and urges them to play by the rules and stay under control, lest he “red-card” them.

Advertisement
In this photo, Todd Rooney stands while holding a long metal sword. He's wearing a black protective sword-fighting outfit that has a skull patch on one sleeve.

Todd Rooney, a high school English teacher, is photographed on Oct. 4. Rooney is a competitor in the long-sword tournament.

Justin Merriman for NPR


hide caption

toggle caption

Justin Merriman for NPR

Advertisement

“These are teachable moments,” the judge says. “We fight at Friday Night Fights to learn and help each other.”

More fighters line up. Among them is high school English teacher and long-sword instructor Todd Rooney.

He’s holding his headgear, waiting for his name to be called to fight. Rooney has been a member of the sword fighters’ club for almost 10 years and appreciates the politics-free zone.

“Because that rule exists here, I get to work with, spar with, teach, learn from people from all different walks of life, all different political affiliations, religious groups,” Rooney says.

Advertisement

And the controlled conflict of a sword fight, he says, brings about a kind of clarity.

“We have to encounter each other as fully human — we have to respect each other,” he says. “And it’s especially important here, when we’re coming at each other with weapons.”

In this photo, nine men and one woman are congregated around the steps of the former church where the sword fights are held. They are wearing casual clothes. Some are sitting or standing on the steps, while a few are standing in front of the steps.

Members gather on the steps of the former Catholic church where Pittsburgh Sword Fighters hosts a Friday Night Fights long-sword tournament.

Justin Merriman for NPR


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Justin Merriman for NPR

Continue Reading

Trending