Milgov&civgov

[rcaf_777]

Just wondering if anyone has ideas on how thses governments would look and function

Who in them I know for the MILGOV is made up off the Joint Cheifs but who elese

Since the nuclear attack happens on the US Thanksgiving Weekend, odds are a good number of senior government officals would surrive.

Also the US government could order key departments to have designated survivors and alternate HQ sucj as the FBI, CIA, or FEMA

[kato13]

I missed the point of your question in my original post.

As written Milgov would have a serious leg up on control of govt funcitons as CIVGOV was not formed for months.

Generally I think CIVGOV would only be able to pick up parts of even the functions that you might expect CIA/FBI/FEMA justice etc. Mostly local opportunistic leaders in areas where CIVGOV somehow has access to more local assets.


Edit Below is original post.

Because deputy secretaries and military branch chiefs (and even their deputies) have been approved by the senate and therefore can be considered in the line of succession, there is NO WAY the total lack of a president as presented could happen.

Even with the nukes and Spetnaz units going after parts of the tree, nearly 120 people would need to die.

Cheney spent weeks in a bunker after 9/11 and we are to believe 120 people could be targeted 4 months after nuclear use in Asia and Europe.

If I were writing the conflict now I would have ambiguity as to who should have been promoted. As I mentioned in another thread you could have SECDEF promoted to president with the DIA having full knowledge that SECSTATE is still alive but out of contact. As SECSTATE out ranks SECDEF they should be president, but honestly I can't see once someone is sworn in there being too big of a schism.

[dragoon500ly]

The US line of succession as per the Constitution and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947, the PSA was amended as new cabinet posts were created. However, those heads of departments who are ineligible to run for President are also ineligible to succeed the President. The most common reason being that they are not a natural-born U.S. citizen.

The main line is:

President
Vice President
Speaker of the House of Representatives
President pro tempore of the Senate
The heads of federal executive departments forming the Cabinet

Since 1947, many constitutional law experts have raised questions as the constitutionality of the provisions that the Speaker of the House and the President pro tempore of Senate succeed to the presidency. In 2003 the Continuity of Government Commission raised a number of other issues to the current line of succession.

The first PSA was passed in 1792 and states that the Vice President was the successor to the President. There were concerns at the time about the separation of powers, including if the Chief Justice of the U.S. was included in the succession. The compromise worked out include the Speaker of the House and the President pro tempore of the Senate. It also included the line "that these officers were to act as the President and Vice President until the disability be removed or a president elected."

The PSAs have two issues;
1) the term "Officer" is most plausibly interpreted to mean an "Officer of the United States", who must be a member of either the Executive or Judicial Branch. The Speaker and the President pro tempore are not officially officers in this sense.

2) The separation of powers in the Constitution specifically disallows legislative officials from also.ser ing in the Executive Branch. For either the Speaker or the President pro tempore to become President, them must resign their position, at which point, they are no longer in the line of succession! While this forms a paradox, the latest amendment to.the PSA specifies that the Speaker becomes President "upon his resignation as Speaker and as a member of Congress."

The current order as of 2017 is as follows:

President
Vice President
Speaker of the House of Representatives
President pro tempore of the Senate
Secretary of State
Secretary of the Treasury
Secretary of Defense
Attorney General of the United States
Secretary of the Interior
Secretary of Commerce
Secretary of Labor
Secretary of Health & Human Services
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
Secretary of Transportation
Secretary of Energy
Secretary of Education
Secretary of Veteran Affairs
Secretary of Homeland Security

The Cabinet officers are listed according to the chronological order of their department.

The language of the PSA allows the President to appoint "officers by and with the advice and consent of Senate."

Section 3 of the 20th Amendment provides that if the President-elect dies before his term begins, then the vice president-elect becomes President on Inauguration Day and serves the full four year term. If both the President -elect and the vice president-elect die before taking the oath of office, Congress can pro use by law for the election of a new president-elect and vice-president-elect.

Article.2, Section 1 of the 25th Amendment, states that the Vice President is the designated successor if the President resigns, dies, or is removed from office or if the President is temporarily unable to perform his duties.due to medical condition or mentally unstable. It also requires the new President to fill of office of the Vice President (previously it was the practice to leave the VP position open until the next election).

The PSA does not allow for the situation that shows in T2K, the Joint Chiefs of Staff are not in the line of succession, as their function is to act as advisors to the President. For General Tanner to be able to assume the office of the President, he would have to be appointed, with the advice and consent of the Senate to either a cabinet post (Secretary of Defence for example), or as Vice President. If he is not appointed, then he is simply not able to assume the office of President.

Which makes MilGov the illegal government and CivGov the legitimate one......

[rcaf_777]

Ok great background info, but what I am for is what each government might have EI who would MILGOV have as

President
Vice President
Secretary of State
Secretary of the Treasury
Secretary of Defense
Attorney General of the United States
Secretary of the Interior
Secretary of Commerce
Secretary of Labor
Secretary of Health & Human Services
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
Secretary of Transportation
Secretary of Energy
Secretary of Education
Secretary of Veteran Affairs

[kato13]

MILGOV never establishes a new president from what I recall. They continue to operate under martial law.

I suppose for structure you might want to look at how the US government handled the recovery in Europe after WWII as to what they might do for the equivalent of cabinet posts.

[Draq]

As far as who had what posts, I don't think that's anywhere in the books. And as far as milgov, it would be a Marshal law military council. Civgov would have a hodgepodge of pre-tdm office holders and newly appointed officials... And a hodgepodge of offices and positions given the massive chaos and change necessitating a restructuring.

[kato13]

I just realized that martial, Marshall, and marshal (law enforcement) could in some cases be used interchangeably without too much variance in the meaning of a sentence. Pretty odd given martial and marshal come from two different latin words (for war and horse I believe).

No more odd than religious and sacrilegious also not being related I guess.

English is weird.

[.45cultist]

Ok great background info, but what I am for is what each government might have EI who would MILGOV have as

President
Vice President
Secretary of State
Secretary of the Treasury
Secretary of Defense
Attorney General of the United States
Secretary of the Interior
Secretary of Commerce
Secretary of Labor
Secretary of Health & Human Services
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
Secretary of Transportation
Secretary of Energy
Secretary of Education
Secretary of Veteran Affairs

General Cummings was head and would appoint personnel, most likely senior people whose job could overlap the civilian sector.

[pmulcahy11b]

I know it's heresy compared to most players, but I think that CIVGOV has a more legitimate claim to being the legal US government, having most of the remaining civilian US government in its ranks and not unsizable military forces (though little heavy equipment).

MILGOV, on the other hand, controls a lot of the commo networks and heavy equipment, oil in the Gulf, and large armed forces. They have become the de facto government to many, and probably have their own version of COG (even more illegitimate than CIVGOV's COG).

MILGOV is, essentially trying to replace the legitimate US Government with a military junta. And for a long time after the Twilight War, they will succeed, but the people, as the country recovers and becomes more organized, will want a return to democracy. And this is where CIVGOV steps in.

[Draq]

I just realized that martial, Marshall, and marshal (law enforcement) could in some cases be used interchangeably without too much variance in the meaning of a sentence. Pretty odd given martial and marshal come from two different latin words (for war and horse I believe).

No more odd than religious and sacrilegious also not being related I guess.

English is weird.

... Wow... You're right...

[Draq]

I know it's heresy compared to most players, but I think that CIVGOV has a more legitimate claim to being the legal US government, having most of the remaining civilian US government in its ranks and not unsizable military forces (though little heavy equipment).

MILGOV, on the other hand, controls a lot of the commo networks and heavy equipment, oil in the Gulf, and large armed forces. They have become the de facto government to many, and probably have their own version of COG (even more illegitimate than CIVGOV's COG).

MILGOV is, essentially trying to replace the legitimate US Government with a military junta. And for a long time after the Twilight War, they will succeed, but the people, as the country recovers and becomes more organized, will want a return to democracy. And this is where CIVGOV steps in.

Exactly. Given the condition of the war, both at home and abroad, the military being in control is really what's needed.

[pmulcahy11b]

English is weird.

Just ask my mother. She learned four languages and parts of two more, and English still gives her problems sometimes. And she's been in this country since 1962.

[.45cultist]

I know it's heresy compared to most players, but I think that CIVGOV has a more legitimate claim to being the legal US government, having most of the remaining civilian US government in its ranks and not unsizable military forces (though little heavy equipment).

MILGOV, on the other hand, controls a lot of the commo networks and heavy equipment, oil in the Gulf, and large armed forces. They have become the de facto government to many, and probably have their own version of COG (even more illegitimate than CIVGOV's COG).

MILGOV is, essentially trying to replace the legitimate US Government with a military junta. And for a long time after the Twilight War, they will succeed, but the people, as the country recovers and becomes more organized, will want a return to democracy. And this is where CIVGOV steps in.

They tried to muddy the waters both had good and bad points. I think they wanted each group to choose in their game worlds and show more chaos and change.

[dragoon500ly]

Martial Law, Part 1

In a previous post I detailed the Presidential Succession Act which lays out who is within the legitimate succession. The BYB specifics that the split between MilGov and CivGov occurred following the Thanksgiving Day Massacre and further specifies that MilGov claims to be the legitimate United States Government by virtual of a Presidential Decree of Martial Law.
But what is Martial Law and how does it apply to the United States usconstitution.net defines martial law as:

oeIn strict dictionary terms, martial law is the suspension of civil authority and the imposition of military authority. When we say a region or country is "under martial law," we mean to say that the military is in control of the area, that it acts as the police, as the courts, as the legislature. The degree of control might vary - a nation may have a civilian legislature but have the courts administered by the military. Or the legislature and courts may operate under civilian control with a military ruler. In each case, martial law is in effect, even if it is not called "martial law."

oeMartial law should not be confused with military justice. In the United States, for example, each branch of the military has its own judicial structures in place. Members of the service are under the control of military law, and in some cases civilians working for or with the military may be subject to military law. But this is the normal course of business in the military. Martial law is the exception to the rule. In the United States, the military courts were created by the Congress, and cases can be appealed out of the military system to the Supreme Court in many cases. In addition, a civilian court can petition the military for habeas corpus.

oeArticle 1, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution states, "The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." Habeas corpus is a concept of law, in which a person may not be held by the government without a valid reason for being held. A writ of habeas corpus can be issued by a court upon a government agency (such as a police force or the military). Such a writ compels the agency to produce the individual to the court, and to convince the court that the person is being reasonably held. The suspension of habeas corpus allows an agency to hold a person without a charge. Suspension of habeas corpus is often equated with martial law.

oeBecause of this connection of the two concepts, it is often argued that only Congress can declare martial law, because Congress alone is granted the power to suspend the writ. The President, however, is commander-in-chief of the military, and it has been argued that the President can take it upon himself to declare martial law. In these times, Congress may decide not to act, effectively accepting martial law by failing to stop it; Congress may agree to the declaration, putting the official stamp of approval on the declaration; or it can reject the President's imposition of martial law, which could set up a power struggle between the Congress and the Executive that only the Judiciary would be able to resolve.

oeIn the United States, there is precedent for martial law. Several times in the course of our history, martial law of varying degrees has been declared. The most obvious and often-cited example was when President Lincoln declared martial law during the Civil War. This instance provides us with most of the rules for martial law that we would use today, should the need arise.

[dragoon500ly]

ex parte Milligan, Martial Law Part 2

oeOn September 15, 1863, Lincoln imposed Congressionally-authorized martial law. The authorizing act allowed the President to suspend habeas corpus throughout the entire United States. Lincoln imposed the suspension on "prisoners of war, spies, or aiders and abettors of the enemy," as well as on other classes of people, such as draft dodgers. The President's proclamation was challenged in ex parte Milligan (71 US 2 [1866]). The Supreme Court ruled that Lincoln's imposition of martial law (by way of suspension of habeas corpus) was unconstitutional.

oeIn arguments before the Court, the counsel for the United States spoke to the question of "what is martial law" "Martial law," it was argued, "is the will of the commanding officer of an armed force, or of a geographical military department, expressed in time of war within the limits of his military jurisdiction, as necessity demands and prudence dictates, restrained or enlarged by the orders of his military chief, or supreme executive ruler." In other words, martial law is imposed by a local commander on the region he controls, on an as-needed basis. Further, it was argued, "The officer executing martial law is at the same time supreme legislator, supreme judge, and supreme executive. As necessity makes his will the law, he only can define and declare it; and whether or not it is infringed, and of the extent of the infraction, he alone can judge; and his sole order punishes or acquits the alleged offender."

oeIn this case, Lambden Milligan, for whom the case is named, was arrested in Indiana as a Confederate sympathizer. Indiana, like the rest of the United States, was part of a military district set up to help conduct the war. Milligan was tried by military commission and sentenced to die by hanging. After his conviction, Milligan petitioned the Circuit Court for habeas corpus, arguing that his arrest, trial, and conviction were all unconstitutional. What the Supreme Court had to decide, it said, was "Had [the military commission] the legal power and authority to try and punish [Milligan]"

oeResoundingly, the Court said no. The Court stated what is almost painfully obvious: "Martial law ... destroys every guarantee of the Constitution." The Court reminded the reader that such actions were taken by the King of Great Britain, which caused, in part, the Revolution. "Civil liberty and this kind of martial law cannot endure together; the antagonism is irreconcilable; and, in the conflict, one or the other must perish."

oeDid this mean that martial law could never be implemented No, the Court said. The President can declare martial law when circumstances warrant it: When the civil authority cannot operate, then martial law is not only constitutional, but would be necessary: "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."