The only thing stopping Trump right now is the courts. Martial law is an endrun around the courts.
Yes, he is breaking laws, but once the court actually steps up and tells him to stop, he does. We unfortunately have a long history of extrajudicial foreign action that the courts just don’t care about, but that’s not the same as deploying military to one’s own country.
Your concern with people open-carrying at ICE protests is that it risks creating a situation where Trump can declare Martial Law. If that happens, he could use bombs against civilians, with no way for the courts to tell him to stop.
You agree that there is nothing stopping him from using tanks and bombs on civilians right now, but if he does, the courts will tell him to stop at some point in the future. And he probably would, but then he would come back later, probably with more weaponry.
Now that’s a whole lot of stuff I didn’t say. You wanted to know how Martial Law would be different than what we’ve got now, and I gave you the answer.
I also disagree with your entire second paragraph. Something is clearly stopping him from bombing us right now, and you seem to be suggesting that it’s not the courts, it’s… his own goodwill? What?
You’re right, I got mixed up with this thread and another – this is about opening fire.
I also disagree with your entire second paragraph. Something is clearly stopping him from bombing us right now, and you seem to be suggesting that it’s not the courts, it’s… his own goodwill? What?
That’s a false premise. Just because he isn’t doing something doesn’t mean he’s prevented from doing it.
You could have said exactly the same thing about deploying the national guard to those states before he did it, and we can see that you would have been wrong.
You believe the only thing stopping that is Trump saying “I declare Martial Law”?
He also can’t just kidnap a foreign leader without notifying congress – except he actually just can.
The only thing stopping Trump right now is the courts. Martial law is an endrun around the courts.
Yes, he is breaking laws, but once the court actually steps up and tells him to stop, he does. We unfortunately have a long history of extrajudicial foreign action that the courts just don’t care about, but that’s not the same as deploying military to one’s own country.
Stopping him how?
Like when? And what good is telling him to stop after he’s already done the thing? What’s to stop him from just defying it again?
I’m referring to things like this:
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/12/31/donald-trump-national-guard-deployment-00708714
You may think it’s ineffective, but it’s why we’re not staring down the barrel of a tank right now.
Let me know if I’m summarizing this fairly:
Your concern with people open-carrying at ICE protests is that it risks creating a situation where Trump can declare Martial Law. If that happens, he could use bombs against civilians, with no way for the courts to tell him to stop.
You agree that there is nothing stopping him from using tanks and bombs on civilians right now, but if he does, the courts will tell him to stop at some point in the future. And he probably would, but then he would come back later, probably with more weaponry.
Now that’s a whole lot of stuff I didn’t say. You wanted to know how Martial Law would be different than what we’ve got now, and I gave you the answer.
I can quote everything I included in that summary if you give me examples of things you think you didn’t say.
You assume I’m against open carry, for one.
I also disagree with your entire second paragraph. Something is clearly stopping him from bombing us right now, and you seem to be suggesting that it’s not the courts, it’s… his own goodwill? What?
You’re right, I got mixed up with this thread and another – this is about opening fire.
That’s a false premise. Just because he isn’t doing something doesn’t mean he’s prevented from doing it.
You could have said exactly the same thing about deploying the national guard to those states before he did it, and we can see that you would have been wrong.