Martial Law is coming. Here is a likely playbook of what happens next

[Mr.WeRP]

https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/trump-insurrection-act-april-20-20269810.php

On Jan. 20, Trump issued an executive order tasking the secretaries of the Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security to submit a joint report, within 90 days, recommending “whether to invoke the Insurrection Act.” The deadline for that report is April 20.
…
He also replaced the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs with a CPAC-darling who endeared himself to Trump by wearing a MAGA hat. And he fired the Judge Advocate Generals for the Army, Navy and Air Force — the top uniformed lawyers responsible for reviewing the orders from the commander-in-chief and defense secretary to determine whether they’re legal. Trump’s defense secretary explained this action was taken preemptively to prevent the JAGs from blocking “orders that are given by a commander in chief.” Clearing the way, among other things, for the White House to begin consolidating federal law enforcement under military leadership. The Secretary of the Army, for example, in a move consistent with preparing for martial law, was just placed in charge of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), with surprisingly little push back.

…

Let’s be clear what this adds up to: The man who promised to “declare martial law on day one” has wasted no time taking actions designed to subvert the military to meet this end.
Yet despite Trump’s fondness for blasting through norms, there is one norm upon which his apparent plan, and political survival, depends: the military recognizing him as their commander-in-chief and obeying his orders.
That norm is no more carved in stone than any other.

More at the link but essentially, once Trump issues an order to use the military against the civilian population or any other illegal order, the military, as coded into military law, can remove any executive, including the President, who would violate the Constitution. Ultimately, declaring Martial Law may backfire on Trump. Our only hope, if he does, is that the Military removes him.

[Tickle]

1. It is supposed to be this Sunday 4/20 NT

[EYESORE 9001]

34. So I've heard

I haven’t seen anything concrete, and I think people picked 4/20 is that it’s 90 days past the inauguration - and that’s supposed to be an important milestone in the Project 2025 playbook.

[orleans]

57. 4/20?

[Tickle]

63. 😂😂😂 NT

[questionseverything]

77. Sadly it's hitler's bday too

[stollen]

59. "He" is risen?

[EarthAbides]

81. Hitler's Birthday

Besides being Easter Sunday and Pot Day. Again, it's a Sunday, why Sunday?

[Tickle]

82. It's a trifecta. NT

[OMGWTF]

42. Coincidentally, the next national rally against this criminal regime is Saturday, April 19th

The rally on April 5th drew 5.5 million people in the US and millions more around the world. This could be our last chance to speak out. My sign is double-sided and says: "F ELON and 47" on one side and 'Too much shit to list" on the other side.

Check out 50501, Womens March, or Indivisible's websites to find your tribe. Get in the car bitches and don't forget your signs.

[beaglelover]

76. On Easter Sunday? Yeah, that's realistic.

[LudwigPastorius]

2. "...the military...can remove any executive, including the President, who would violate the Constitution."

Exactly what law says that the military can remove a president who violates the Constitution?

[Mr.WeRP]

5. Read the article?

Here let me snip it for you:

The applicable authority is in Army Regulation 600-20, which addresses command function, and the command that focuses on causes for removal. Sufficient cause should be evident,

[LudwigPastorius]

6. The Commander in Chief is not a member of the military and is not bound by military law.

Besides, Regulation 600-20, 2-18 "Relief for cause" concerns superior officers removing a subordinate. Trump, as CIC, is not subordinate to anyone in the chain of command.

[onenote]

10. You are right of course. Not that it will deter the fear mongers spreading misinformation

[Mr.WeRP]

13. They aren't right.

[writerJT]

65. Convincing rebuttal.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

79. You do realize that onenote is a lawyer don't ya?

He is well versed in Constitutional Law, so I think I'll go with his comments.

[writerJT]

66. Yep. And that person is relying

solely on the appeal to authority fallacy. Comical thread.

[Mr.WeRP]

12. Under Martial Law there is no Civilian commander

This playbook is written by a Military scholar and is a former Marine officer.

[sl8]

18. Which author is/was a Marine?

I'm not seeing that in either authors' bios.

[Mr.WeRP]

20. Scroll to the bottom of the article

Brett Wagner, now retired, served as professor of national security decision making for the U.S. Naval War College, and adjunct fellow at the Center for International and Strategic Studies. J. Holmes Armstead, now retired, served as professor of Strategy and International Law at the U.S. Naval War College, and as a Judge Advocate General, Inspector General, and Civil Affairs Officer in the U.S. Army, Army Reserves and National Guard.

[sl8]

21. I saw that - it doesn't mention the Marines.

I also did a quick search and didn't see it listed in either's CVs.

It was a very cursory search, possibly I missed something.

[LudwigPastorius]

25. "Under Martial Law there is no Civilian commander"

So, Trump just declares himself a 6 Star General of the Combined Armed Forces?

Also, you are appealing to authority. Are the authors' opinions representative of the expert consensus?

It is possible to find an expert authority, or two, to represent just about any argument one wishes.

[Native]

46. According to the article, once he declares Martial Law, he becomes a member of the military, as does his 2nd in command

, Vance. Makes perfectly good sense to me.

[brush]

62. I don't know? The corrupt SCOTUS 6's ruling giving him immunity for 'official acts'...

may be viewed as superseding that provision.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

3. The truly scary thing is just how many

in law enforcement are happy to support Trump, torture, and deport citizens,

[Irish_Dem]

9. Yes very sad so many federal officers are thrilled to act like Hitler's Gestapo.

[BadgerKid]

4. Whom could T try to command if the military refuses?

You have state and local police, reserves, and probably self-important MAGA adherents. I imagine there would be … conflicts.

[taxi]

16. The constitutional sheriff's and all those weird underground militia.

It is these people who believe that it takes only a few percent of a population to overthrow the system. And these crazies like the violence.

[TommyT139]

28. Erik Prince has offered a plan

Trump allies circulate mass deportation plan calling for ‘processing camps’ and a private citizen ‘army’
The group, led by Blackwater veteran Erik Prince, has close Trump ties.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/25/documents-military-contractors-mass-deportations-022648

Basically it's rent-a-militia, except the Blackwater mercenaries are far better trained and equipped.

[AverageOldGuy]

48. Blackwater mercenaries may be trained and equipped.

But a 5.56 mm round fired from a AR-15 will do to any one of them what it does to anyone else.

And when Trump imposes the Insurrection Act, and the protests start, I will be there and I will NOT be unarmed.

[TommyT139]

52. You know this is a public website, right?

Searchable by google...With a name that sounds like like it would make a great target for the trumpists?

[OMGWTF]

47. There's the Gravy Seals and the fearsome Meal Team Six.

[RJ-MacReady]

7. I have said before

This is why blue states need to replace all national gaurd commanders who would obey trump, now.

[TommyT139]

30. No - just call up the guards first

This excellent article, although slightly optimistic, because it was written prior to inauguration) holds that governors should call up their guards before Trump does, because then he can't.

https://wagingnonviolence.org/2025/04/what-to-do-if-the-insurrection-act-is-invoked/

[onenote]

8. No it's not. The folks saying it is don't know what "martial law" is.

Anyone claiming that Trump is preparing to declare 'martial law' based on the April 20 report doesn't know what 'martial law' actually is.

Here is how the Supreme Court described martial law and the circumstances in which it can be declared:

Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 2 (1866)

"If, in foreign invasion or civil war, the courts are actually closed, and it is impossible to administer criminal justice according to law, then, on the theatre of active military operations, where war really prevails, there is a necessity to furnish a substitute for the civil authority, thus overthrown, to preserve the safety of the army and society; and as no power is left but the military, it is allowed to govern by martial rule until the laws can have their free course. As necessity creates the rule, so it limits its duration; for, if this government is continued after the courts are reinstated, it is a gross usurpation of power. Martial rule can never exist where the courts are open, and in the proper and unobstructed exercise of their jurisdiction. It is also confined to the locality of actual war."

What Trump may well do is invoke the Insurrection Ac so as to override the Posse Comitatus Act, which otherwise limits the use of the military for lw enforcement -- not as a substitute for the judiciary. The Insurrection Act has been invoked on a number of occasions, by presidents of both parties. For example it was invoked by LBJ to assist in responding to riots following the assassination of Dr. King and most recently by GWBush in response to riots following the beating of Rodney King.

I'm not suggesting at all that Trump invoking the Insurrection Act is appropriate or not a big deal. The situations in which it has been invoked in the past, such as the ones mentioned above, involved actual ongoing violence that local law enforcement could not quell without the assistance of the military. That is not the situation today, although Trump and his enablers will argue that the Insurrection Act is broad enough to allow him to invoke it to deal with immigration matters.

But the bottom line is that the opinion writers and pundits who are predicting that Trump is going to invoke "martial law" either haven't bothered to inform themselves as to the meaning of "martial law" or are ignoring that meaning to fear monger for clicks.

[Irish_Dem]

11. You could not be more wrong.

Marital law will be whatever the hell Trump tells us it is.

No one can or will stop him.

Quoting the law and the way things used to be is a total waste of time.

It is time to face reality.

[onenote]

22. So if he declares that the military is in charge of trash collection, that too is martial law?

No it's not.
Martial law has a specific meaning. The Insurrection Act has a specific meaning. They are not the same.

Unless Trump claims the courts actually aren't functioning, and replaces them with military tribunals, he hasn't declared "martial law." He may have, and like will, use an Insurrection Act declaration to allow the use of the military for domestic law enforcement, overriding the prohibition on that in the Posse Comitatus Act. But doing so, as was the case when other presidents invoked the Insurrection Act wasn't considered invoking "martial law" -- unless of course, you are prepared to argue that LBJ and JFK invoked martial law during their presidencies.

[LiberalArkie]

58. And the supremes have to decide what martial law is. It is what they say it is.

[onenote]

67. Do you think Trump will replace civilian courts with military tribunals?

If he does so, that would be martial law and the Court would have to decide whether it is consistent with precedent that holds military tribunals can act in place of civilian courts only where and when and for as long as those courts are actually unable to function.

But if all he does is authorize the military to perform civilian law enforcement -- something that the Insurrection Act allows in limited circumstances and something that has been done many times in the nation's history, there won't be any point to the Supreme Court saying that this is "martial law" -- the question, if presented to the court, would be whether the Insurrection Act was legitimately invoked. The concept of martial law will play no part in the analysis or decision.

Folks are intent in conflating martial law and the insurrection act. And all that will do is make Trump look less crazy when he doesn't declare martial law but instead invokes the insurrection act and uses it as it has been used before, albeit in a situation where it never has been used before and should not be allowed.

Too often, folks don't seem to realize that by getting caught up in 'worst case' scenarios that are at odds with the law and facts, they end up normlizing what Trump does. For example, earlier this month, a post on DU predicted that the stock market would be down to 10,000 by the end of the month, based on the fact that over a few days it had dropped an average of 1000 a day. Well, I may be going out on a limb, but it certainly seems unlikely that the market will be anywhere near 10,000 two weeks from now. It certainly isn't dropping 1000 every day. So, while the amount it has dropped is very bad, very serious, by making an unrealistic, fear mongering prediction, that poster only minimizes the harm that actually will occur.

[LiberalArkie]

71. I do not think anyone but Stephen Miller knows what will be done with Trumps signature

[MorbidButterflyTat]

26. That sounds dire

How do we face reality?

[Mr.WeRP]

15. You are way off base bud.

The author is a known military scholar and former marine.

I also served my country in the Army. I’ll take the author’s authority on this matter over some dude on the Internet.

[AverageOldGuy]

45. Trump doesn't give a flying fuck

And what Trump thinks is all that matters.

[sl8]

14. Politifact: Insurrection Act vs. martial law: What power applies to Trump's April 20 deadline

https://www.politifact.com/article/2025/apr/16/Trump-insurrection-act-not-same-as-martial-law/

Insurrection Act vs. martial law: What power applies to Trump’s April 20 deadline?

By Madison Czopek
April 16, 2025

If Your Time is short

- Social media posts predicted that President Donald Trump will declare martial law April 20, but they appeared to conflate it with the Insurrection Act of 1807, which was mentioned in a recent executive order.

- Invoking the Insurrection Act would not create what is commonly understood as martial law, legal experts said.

- Legal experts said they don’t see a clear path for Trump to lawfully implement martial law in the way it’s commonly understood, but some of Trump’s statements and actions signal a disregard for legal and constitutional limits.

Social media posts have warned for more than a month that President Donald Trump will declare martial law April 20, which typically means suspending civil law while the military takes control of civilian functions such as courts.

[...]

[Ursus Rex]

17. LMAO at " lawfully implement martial law"

That's the whole point of no return, though, isn't it? (h/t to Paul Weller for the phrase )

[sl8]

19. Yeah, paraphrasing, they basically said "... but it's Trump, so who knows what he'll try" nt

[onenote]

23. Thanks. Of course it won't satisfy the folks who claim otherwise, facts be damned.

[TommyT139]

32. Yeah, the article from the OP is clear: Insurrection Act.

[AverageOldGuy]

43. "Legal experts said they don't see a clear path for Trump to lawfully implement martial law . . . "

Are these the same "legal experts" who told us Trump could not ship people to hellhole prisons in El Salvador?

Listen up: The rules that we all grew up with, the rules that were in effect on Jan 19, 2025, are no longer in effect. They died at noon on Jan 20, 2025. We now live in a society with no rules except what Trump says.

[onenote]

69. Do you think he will shut down civilian courts and replace them with military tribunals?

Or do you think he will use the military for domestic law enforcement.

One is martial law. One isn't.

Which do you think he's going to do?

[Buckeyeblue]

24. Our military isn't big enough to manage our population

If Trump declared martial law--and I don't think he will--I think it would cause a national revolt. I also think congress would impeach and convict him in the face of such a national revolt.

[SayItLoud]

27. All the bickering here about:

Can they, will they, do they, is it Legal, is it outside the norms and standards! All a waste of digital ink so to speak....THEY WILL DO NOTHING BUT FOLLOW THE dicktator.

[BoRaGard]

29. I have no problems with people who dodged the draft

Many had honorable, conscientious reasons.

But I have a big problem with a five-timer strutting around demanding that everyone kiss his ass, and salute him as if he had as much as thimble of honor

[WiVoter]

31. April 20, Hitler's Birthday

Yeah, this fucker will try it.

[OMGWTF]

53. It's also Easter Sunday which is a BFD in the Xitian cult.

[Bayard]

33. At this point I wouldn't put anything past trump

He's out of control, and playing the mad king.

Yes, I think the key is--how will the military respond. Just following orders, or following the law and Constitution.

[lark]

35. Military will 100% back tsf's orders.

Everyone who wouldn't has already been fired and replaced with reich wing sycophants - WATCH.

[FoggyLake]

36. It's agonizing to read all the posts that are parsing the laws...

..and trying to figure out what is legal. IT DOESN'T MATTER ANYMORE. In an emergency you do what is necessary. I for one am hoping that the military would rise up against the administration and send their treasonous asses to CECOT.

[dchill]

37. Why? WHY!

[bronxiteforever]

38. Remember the song Silent Running in the 1980s

I think of these lyrics these days in relation to our state.

Take the children and yourself
And hide out in the cellar
By now the fighting will be close at hand
Don't believe the church and state
And everything they tell you
Believe in me, I'm with the high command
Can you hear me, can you hear me running?
Can you hear me running, can you hear me calling you?
Can you hear me, can you hear me running?
Can you hear me running, can you hear me calling you
Mike & the Mechanics

[infullview]

39. Trump will play this card.

And even though he has placed his sycophants In high places, they are still civilian and therefore have no code of conduct moral or otherwise. I have more faith in our generals to uphold the constitution and bring good trouble when/if needed.

[Aviation Pro]

40. Project 2025, Chapters 4 and 5

Google it.

[AverageOldGuy]

41. The military chain of command is:

President
to
SECDEF
to
The Combatant Commands -- that is, to the four-star Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps generals who command the war-fighting assets.

Note that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the entire Joint Chiefs of Staff ARE NOT IN THE WAR-FIGHTING CHAIN OF COMMAND. Neither CJCS nor a member of the JCS can block a Presidential order. The CJCS is the principal military advisor to the President but does not command a single troop. Ditto for the members of the JCS.

[CaptainTruth]

44. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State..."

This is the first time I've ever felt like it may actually be "necessary to the security of a free State".

[moonshinegnomie]

64. i went out a bought a firearm today

and a lot of ammo

[Arazi]

78. GOP is going to be surprised at how many Dems own firearms

[CaptainTruth]

84. I've been thinking along those same lines.

[jmowreader]

49. How the military can get rid of Trump without firing a shot...

Step One: the people working at the Air Force wing that runs Trump’s planes will remove and lose the spark plugs from Air Force One. Okay, they’re called igniters but Trump doesn’t know that.

Step Two: they also remove and lose the spark plugs from the president’s limo fleet.

Step Three: “Oh no Mr President, these are special presidential spark plugs that can’t be substituted and we can’t get them anymore.”

Step Four: give it about a week, and Trump will resign so he can play golf again.

[Botany]

50. Krasnov already has his "head busters"

150,000 ex police who had their federal records expunged, proud boys, and all those January
6th shits he pardoned.

Senor García’s being picked up and flown to El Salvador and most likely killed and then Blondie
McSpokesperson press conference yesterday afternoon was chilling with bringing in the mother
of daughter who was killed by an immigrant to try to equate that murderer with García and her
total lies and slander of García was scary as shit.

And Musk’s DOGE boys sending our information to Russia via Star Link is chilling too.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100220245921

Not to mention Fox was all in on trying to say that the burning of Gov. Shapiro’s home
as he and his family were in it is an example of sides do it because Tulsi Gabbard got
a mean text message.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100220245921

Btw that election was completely dirty too.

[GP6971]

55. Why do you always repeat yourself??? Doesn't

it get boring?

[GP6971]

56. You sure about that?

[sheshe2]

68. Gone but not forgotten.

She is the gift that keeps on giving!

[GP6971]

73. A White Elephant Gift!

[MorbidButterflyTat]

74. Psst!

I love the images in your signature line.

[sheshe2]

75. Thank you!

I wish I could make them larger, but that is the best I could do.

[Historic NY]

60. A peoples militia should be constituted

[LiberalArkie]

61. Maybe they figure the Democrats will not notice it, if the do it on international pot smoking day?

[flashman13]

70. Everyone needs to read the full article. Without military support a tRump coup is doomed to failure.

I want to add that General Milley, on several occasion, made it clear that the military will not obey illegal orders. Also, when the National Guard is nationalized it becomes subject to the federal chain of command. The Pentagon can order Guard formations to stand down and return to barracks.

As the article states, their scenario is just one of many. There surely will be a violent MAGAt reaction. IMHO, most of the MAGAts have far bigger mouths than balls. They forget that once martial law is declared, the military is charged with putting down a rebellion. Just as a reminder, the military has all of the real firepower it needs to suppress a gun loving, couch potato surfing, pickup truck loving army of wannabe rebels.

The cosmic irony of declaring martial law on 4/20 is stunning.

[choie]

72. I must have missed something...

where's the insurrection?

[BlueTsunami2018]

80. How would this be enforced?

I’m not saying this isn’t out of the question at some point but I don’t see how you impose military rule over 340 million people, even if you recalled every single active duty soldier/sailor/airman/marine and called up every reservist. There simply aren’t enough resources to do this.

And this assumes everyone is just going to obey. I don’t think that’s going to happen either. There are parts of the country where it’s ill advised for any outsider to go.

Reminds me of one of Bogart’s lines in Casablanca.

?si=5WNjdKjB4pgMt9Ag

[William769]

83. I know it's coming.

I'm as ready as I can be for it no matter what I need to do.

[RJ-MacReady]

85. If true

There will be inevitable gun fights in the streets and then when that happens it's all over.