Why the National Guard at Federal Detention Centers Is Fully Legal

1. 84

   Sharlee01posted 2 hours ago

   
   
   
   FACTS ON THE ISSUE---   At the end of the day, the law is clear: federal detention centers are secure federal property, protests that interfere with operations are illegal, and the President has full legal authority to deploy the National Guard to protect these facilities. This isn’t a matter of opinion — it’s backed by multiple statutes, including 18 U.S.C. § 1382, 18 U.S.C. § 111, 10 U.S.C. §§ 331–335, and the Posse Comitatus Act. The facts leave no room for debate: protecting federal property and the employees who work there is not only lawful — it is required.
   
   I keep seeing people question whether it’s lawful for President Trump to use the National Guard at federal detention centers, and I want to explain why this is fully within the law. First, it’s important to remember that these facilities are secure federal properties, and the law strictly prohibits unauthorized access, obstruction, or violent activity on them. 18 U.S.C. § 1382 makes it illegal to enter or remain on certain federal properties without permission, including facilities like military bases, federal buildings, and by extension, detention centers, when doing so interferes with operations. This means that protests that cross the line into obstruction or violence are illegal, giving federal authorities the right, and duty to protect the property.
   
   The President has additional authority to deploy forces for these purposes. Under 10 U.S.C. §§ 331–335, commonly known as the Insurrection Act and related statutes, the President can use federal forces, including the National Guard when federalized, to protect federal property or enforce federal law. Even when not invoking the full Insurrection Act, the Guard can be deployed at the request of federal agencies like the Department of Homeland Security or ICE to ensure the safety of employees and maintain order.
   
   Further, the Posse Comitatus Act generally restricts domestic military involvement in law enforcement, but it specifically allows exceptions when federal property is at risk or federal law enforcement requires protection. The Guard, acting in support of federal authorities, is legally permitted to operate in this context. Additionally, 18 U.S.C. § 111 makes it a crime to assault, resist, or impede federal officers while they are performing their duties. reinforcing the legal framework for protecting employees at these facilities.
   
   Taken together, these laws clearly establish that protests on federal detention center grounds are illegal and that the President has the lawful authority to authorize the National Guard to secure these sites. It’s not about overreach or militarizing a situation unnecessarily; it’s about enforcing federal law, protecting property, and ensuring the safety of employees who are simply doing their jobs. In my view, understanding this legal framework is critical before jumping to conclusions about the use of the Guard in these situations.

   replyreport
2. 71

   Ken Burgessposted 36 minutes ago

   Its more than legal... its necessary because ICE officers are being attacked for doing their duty... Police officers are being attacked for doing their duty...
   
   The "protesters" that are attacking them are the criminals... are "enemies of the state"... enemies of American Citizens and the Nation.
   
   They should be treated as such.

   replyreport
   1. 84

      Sharlee01posted 3 minutes agoin reply to this

      So very necessary. I see them as homegrown terrorists, and we shouldn’t be expected to work around people who threaten our communities. I fully support sending federal forces into any state where ICE can’t do its job — and I’ll be furious if President Trump doesn’t stand up for ICE and protect American citizens first.

      replyreport