Saik0

https://www.justsecurity.org/92568/federalizing-national-guard-domestic-use-military/

There is a long and storied history of federalizing the National Guard.

And there are laws in place to allow it.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/12406

(2) there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States; or

But once again… This is not up to the Joe (the rank and file member of the military) to discern.

Edit: No offense to anyone… but it’s clear that none of you have served in any military capacity. Nor have any meaningful knowledge of how any of it works.

That’s not up to the Joe.

And no they haven’t. They’re under northcom. Northcoms primary duty/role is to respond to these events. My unit was trained for a rotation under for this exact duty back in 2010.

Nothing illegal about sitting around and doing nothing… or riot defense against a building though… Which is the only things I’ve seen thus far.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.lawd.210781/gov.uscourts.lawd.210781.1.0.pdf
and
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.lawd.210781/gov.uscourts.lawd.210781.6.0_3.pdf

Indeed. If you read the actual response… no deportation occurred for the 2 year old.

From the petitioner’s council:

The officer overheard and said that V.M.L. would not be deported and explained that V.M.L.’s mother and sister had deportation orders.

From ICE:

Should her mother decide to allow Petitioner Mack and the purported father to take custody of V.M.L., V.M.L. is not prohibited from entering the United States.

The claim is that the father didn’t identify himself (likely because of his own immigration status), so they couldn’t release child to him. Since he didn’t want to identify himself, any claim that the mother wanted to take the child with her must be held, no “friend” can take custody at that point. The only identified parent isn’t consenting.

It looks like there was an exhibit referenced in the ICE response document. That exhibit is likely the letter they reference that the mother wrote.

It’s a shit situation… It’s not good in the slightest, but it isn’t “American Citizen deported”.

Mother can easily state that she would like to give custody to the petitioning “friend” and V.M.L. can return.

My phone has that too… but only for the signed in network. Not for other networks that are saved on the device. I have a guest network that I shove guests on that have some restrictions (blocked from homelab network for the most part). I would need to swap to that network myself then click share…

You pull it up on another phone.

The owner pulls it up on THEIR phone, so you can just have the guest scan the QR code.

Edit: or my usecase would be to put it on a tablet that I have on a stand near the front door.

Okay? So where are you telling the top commenter that having soft power with a ceremonial monarchy is pointless?

Why is everyone getting up and arms like it matters if they have no actual power?