Martial Law

[Raellus]

So, I toy with CONUS-based campaign ideas every once in a while, and the following question occurred to me today. I figured it would be more interesting to ask around here than start digging through my source books and adventure module.

Would areas under MilGov control be in a perpetual state of de facto martial law?

Would CivGov-controlled territories attempt to rebuild and maintain some sort of civil law system, if only to set themselves apart from MilGov cantonments?

I can see a return to the O.G. circuit court system, with itinerant judges riding (sometimes literally) between settlements. Escorting or intercepting said circuit judge would make for a decent adventure starter.

[RN7]

I think in MilGov controlled areas you are going to see perpetual de facto Martial Law due to the fact that the military has replaced all forms of civilian authority, including any remnant police forces. MilGov may also give allied local militias some authority. I don't know how MilGov could constantly enforce military laws over civilians in their areas, but I suppose civilians would accept it due to the safety and other services that MilGov forces would give them.

In CivGov areas maybe some civil law and even regular police, but I think they would be strictly under CivGov military control and they might just only exist as a token nod to their civil legal legitimacy.

The more I think about it I think CivGov would have to act the same as MilGov to have any authority, as only armed force is going to be an effective deterrent to unlawful elements in these times. Other than the fact that CivGov claims to represent the surviving elected government of the US I don't really see that much difference between both groups.

[ArmySGT.]

Martial Law for the more heinous crimes of murder, rape, etc.....and an adjunct civil court for damages, marriage, property rights and things not covered under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).

Martial Law is streamlined and still has penalties like death by hanging for crimes less than murder.

The Military Civil law is virtually non existent.

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by RN7

I think in MilGov controlled areas you are going to see perpetual de facto Martial Law due to the fact that the military has replaced all forms of civilian authority, including any remnant police forces.

Agreed. I imagine that on the whole any surviving pre War civilian law enforcement officers are likely to be absorbed into the military structure, possibly into provisional MP units that would also include personnel from the various support arms / the Air Force / the Navy etc.

So you might end up with an MP Company that is 10% pre War MP’s (who would form the leadership), 10% pre War LEO’s, and 80% surplus personnel. The LEO’s are given military rank (maybe E5 / E6 dependent on their pre War police rank), military uniform, equipment etc.

But it’s the military calling the shots and administering their interpretation of the law. I think your Judges are more likely to be military officers. In some areas that may be the remnants of the JAG Corps, in others simply the senior military officer or someone appointed by him / her. I can see wide variations dependent on the attitude of the local commander – for example in some areas looting may be deemed to be a capital offence, in others it may not. What constitutes looting may also be subject to interpretation. To use an extreme example, a man can claim he stole food for his family. Whether he’s hanged for looting or let go with a slap on the wrist may depend which Judge he finds himself up in front of.

Originally Posted by RN7

In CivGov areas maybe some civil law and even regular police, but I think they would be strictly under CivGov military control and they might just only exist as a token nod to their civil legal legitimacy.

Other than the fact that CivGov claims to represent the surviving elected government of the US I don't really see that much difference between both groups.

Again, agreed. At the sharp end the only tangible difference might be that in some areas the police officers would still wear their pre War uniforms allowing CivGov to claim that the civilian police still have primacy and the military are simply ‘assisting’ them. Those brought in front of the Courts probably have a much higher chance of coming before a civilian Judge but again you could run the full gamut from an experienced – and fair – pre War Judge to someone whose sole qualification is that they are a crony of the local ‘Mayor’ (who is himself self appointed).

Under both governments I’m sure there would also be individuals who would never find themselves in front of any sort of Judge and would be subjected to summary justice.

[Silent Hunter UK]

I would also imagine that any marauders would be hanged very quickly and their bodies left hanging in public view as a deterrent.

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by Silent Hunter UK

I would also imagine that any marauders would be hanged very quickly and their bodies left hanging in public view as a deterrent.

Agreed to a point, although I would extend that to ‘alleged’ marauders. That’s not me being pedantic, more a commentary on how due process and a fair trial may not necessarily apply in every case. Whether the administering of summary justice may lead to some friction between the military and LEO’s who have been ‘conscripted’ into service is open to speculation and probably down to the LEO’s personal view on such matters (and perhaps how ‘solid’ the case is / was).

What I’m less sure of is the idea of bodies being left on display as a deterrent. I don’t disagree that the idea will probably have some appeal but I’m not sure whether it might be a health hazard, e.g. by helping disease to spread? If the right materials exist an alternative might be to take photos and distribute them through the cantonment area (potentially more people would also see the bodies that way).

Dependent on the nature of the cantonment, forced labour may be an alternative to execution. I’m sure various people have raised that scenario before, Webstral in his Arizona work for one. I also read a non T2k post apoc piece once that mentioned using convicted criminals for work that was dangerous to the point of being lethal – mine clearance for example, or salvaging in radioactive zones.

[dragoon500ly]

For the U.S. military, the restrictions for martial law is codified by the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 and the Insurrection Act of 1807.

The PCA restricts the use of the Army and modified to include the Air Force, essentially it prevents the President from using the regular military to enforce domestic law. The PCA does not cover the Navy and Marines, however, naval regulations are in place that require both branches to fall in line with the PCA.

The Insurrection Act does provide for use of the military under specific circumstances AND for limited periods. The original 1807 act was modified in 2006-2007-2008 and 2011, well outside the T2K period.

The only portions of the military not covered by these acts are the National Guard and the Coast Guard, as these services do have law enforcement duties, the NGs being authorized by their state governor, the Coast Guard by its maritime and regulatory policing missions. Of interest for the USCG, during peacetime it falls under the Treasury Department, but during wartime, falls under Navy control, I have not yet found any mention of if the Coasties lose their law enforcement authority.

Overall, the regular military would not be used to enforce the law, at least within the U.S., but there are plenty of Guardsmen who can be authorized to act as LEOs within their home state.

The question that next rears up is the MilGov/CivGov situation. Based on the T2K back history, MilGov is the legal government based on the Succession Act, CivGov has a rather shaky foundation, with no census and members of Congress "elected" in some rather illegal means, which then casts the legitimacy of the President into question, IMHO. However, I feel that both sides would try to avoid any martial law declarations, rather using FEMA and States "State of Emergency" declarations to place a veil of legitimacy on their actions. Complex? Yup! But it would appear to be legitimate and in keeping with the "Rule of Law".

[Raellus]

I think that shortly after the TDM, and with foreign combatants on American soil, the general public would welcome martial law. I think that acceptance would quickly fade, though.

As time passes and the foreign combatants were expelled or reduced to small parties of more easily managed "marauders", many civilians would begin to chafe under the continuation of martial law. The U.S. has a long tradition of civil authority and jury trials, going back to colonial times. I think that you'd see a lot of push-back against martial law c.2000 and beyond, some of it increasingly violent. This would likely cause a cycle, where rebellious behavior would be met with crack downs, leading to more rebellion and armed insurrection.

I think that this would be a major selling point for CivGov rule. "Join our team; we'll bring back jury trials and let you, the citizens, elect your own sheriffs, judges, and governors, etc.".

[Silent Hunter UK]

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six

What I’m less sure of is the idea of bodies being left on display as a deterrent. I don’t disagree that the idea will probably have some appeal but I’m not sure whether it might be a health hazard, e.g. by helping disease to spread? If the right materials exist an alternative might be to take photos and distribute them through the cantonment area (potentially more people would also see the bodies that way).

They could do both of course.

It was done a lot historically, including to the pirate Captain Kidd.