前总统唐纳德·特朗普说可以使用现役或国民警卫队追捕“激进的左翼疯子”来处理选举日的混乱，警告美国面临的更大问题不是外国敌人，而是“来自内部的人民”。
考虑到特朗普在11月不会指挥美国军队，在政治选举后使用军事力量的建议是假设的。如果他赢得选举，特朗普在就职典礼后的1月中旬之前不会获得对武装部队的控制权。
但在美国境内部署军队是特朗普以前提出的一个建议，包括军队可以维持南部边境的治安，并帮助驱逐美国约1100万无证移民的想法。
“我认为更大的问题是内部的人，”川普告诉福克斯新闻频道的“周日早间期货”
“我们有一些非常坏的人。我们有一些生病的人，激进的左派疯子...如果有必要，由国民警卫队或军方来处理应该非常容易，因为他们不能让这种情况发生。
那么，一位总统可以使用美国军队来管理美国人和镇压政治抗议吗?
特朗普的许多支持者说是的，理由是一项有200年历史的法律旨在遏制叛乱。1807年的暴动法在内战期间和整个20世纪60年代被用来执行民权法律。
法律专家现在警告说，这项法律非常模糊，很容易被滥用。
以下是在美国国土上使用军事力量需要了解的内容:
军方被禁止参与美国人的日常警务。但是它可以用来镇压叛乱
1878年的《治安委员会法案》主要禁止现役军队在美国境内执行执法任务。
这项法律背后的想法是，任何总统——作为美国军队的总司令——都不应该被允许使用联邦军事力量来对付自己的公民。
但是，那个世纪早些时候通过的一项不同的法律引起了许多特朗普支持者的注意。
首次制定于1807年叛乱行为他说，如果一个州发生“任何叛乱、家庭暴力、非法结合或阴谋”，“反对或阻碍美国法律的执行或妨碍这些法律下的司法程序”，总统可以召集民兵或美国武装部队
《起义法》在历史上被使用了数十次，但不是特朗普使用的
根据布伦南正义中心在历史上，该法律被引用了数十次，包括亚伯拉罕·林肯在内战期间以及林登·b·约翰逊在马丁·路德·金遇刺后平息骚乱时。
1957年，德怀特·戴维·艾森豪威尔总统利用法律部署陆军第101空降师的成员护送9名黑人学生进入小石城中心高中，此前阿肯色州州长利用该州的国民警卫队阻止学生进入学校。
最近，乔治H.W布什总统在20世纪60年代援引了这项法律1992年骚乱洛杉矶在此之前，罗德尼·金案件中的警察被宣判无罪。2005年卡特里娜飓风过后，该法律也在考虑之中，但没有被采用。
在1月6日骚乱发生前的几天，一些特朗普的支持者希望总统援引《暴动法》作为极右翼民兵组织袭击国会大厦的理由，并在选举失败后让特朗普继续掌权。
特朗普错误地声称他赢得了选举，但在任期间从未援引叛乱法案。
专家警告说，该法律含糊不清，非常危险
法律专家建议对《叛乱法》进行改革，包括一个提议今年早些时候由美国法律研究所。
“两党一致认为《叛乱法》赋予了任何总统太多不受约束的权力，”杰克·戈德史密斯哈佛大学法学教授、前布什政府助理司法部长说。
不过，如此严重分裂的国会不太可能很快着手处理这个问题。
在处理非法移民问题时，特朗普还可以试图依靠另一部法律——1798年《外国敌人法》,该法允许总统将任何非公民从美国与之交战的国家驱逐出境。
在他的采访中时代杂志今年，特朗普说他将动用国民警卫队进行大规模驱逐，并为非法居住在美国境内的人建立拘留营，但他没有引用法律理由。
最终，特朗普的任何提议是否合法都可能由法院决定，包括他任命的联邦法官。
How Trump could use the military to go after the 'radical left'
Former President Donald Trump saysactive-duty or National Guard troops could be usedto go after "radical left lunatics" to handle any Election Day chaos, warning that the bigger problem facing the United States isn't a foreign enemy but "the people from within."
The suggestion of using military force following a political election is hypothetical, considering Trump won't have command of U.S. troops in November. If he wins the election, Trump wouldn't gain control of the armed forces until mid-January following the inauguration.
But deploying the military within U.S. borders is a suggestion Trump has made before, including the idea that the military could police the southern border and help deport an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States.
"I think the bigger problem are the people from within," Trump told Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures."
"We have some very bad people. We have some sick people, radical left lunatics... And it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard or really necessary by the military, because they can't let that happen," he said.
So, can a president use U.S. troops to police Americans and quash political protests?
Many of Trump's supporters say yes, citing a 200-year-old law meant to curb rebellions. The Insurrection Act of 1807 was used during the Civil War and throughout the 1960s to enforce civil rights laws.
Legal experts are now warning the law is dangerously vague and ripe for abuse.
Here's what to know about the use of military power on U.S. soil:
The military is barred from the daily policing of Americans. But it can be used to quell rebellions
The 1878 Posse Comitatus Act mostly prohibits active-duty military troops from carrying out law enforcement duties inside the United States.
The idea behind the law is that any president -- as commander in chief of U.S. forces -- shouldn't be allowed to use federal military might against its own citizens.
But it's a different law that was passed earlier that century that's caught the attention of many Trump supporters.
First enacted in 1807, theInsurrection Actsays the president can call on a militia or the U.S. armed forces if there's been "any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination or conspiracy" in a state that "opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws."
The Insurrection Act has been used dozens of times throughout history, but not by Trump
According to theBrennan Center for Justice, the law has been invoked dozens of times throughout history, including by Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War and by Lyndon B. Johnson to quell rioting after the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr.
In 1957, President Dwight D. Eisenhower used the law to deploy members of the Army's 101st Airborne Division to escort nine Black students into Little Rock Central High School, after the Arkansas governor used the state's National Guard to prevent the students from entering the school.
More recently, the law was invoked by President George H.W. Bush during the1992 riots inLos Angelesthat followed the trial acquittal of police officers in the Rodney King case. The law was also under consideration in 2005 following Hurricane Katrina, but was not used.
In the days leading up to the Jan. 6 riot, some Trump supporters wanted the president to invoke the Insurrection Act as a justification for far-right militia groups to storm the Capitol and to keep Trump in power despite losing the election.
Trump falsely claimed he won the election, but never invoked the Insurrection Act while in office.
Experts warn the law is dangerously vague
Legal experts have proposed reforms to the Insurrection Act, includingone proposalearlier this year by the American Law Institute.
"There is agreement on both sides of the aisle that the Insurrection Act gives any president too much unchecked power,"Jack Goldsmith, a Harvard law professor and former assistant attorney general in the Bush administration, said last April.
It's unlikely, though, that such a sharply divided Congress would take up the issue any time soon.
There's another law, too, that Trump could try to rely on when it comes to handling illegal immigration -- the 1798 Alien Enemies Act, which allows the president to deport any noncitizen from a country that the U.S. is at war with.
In his interview withTime magazinethis year, Trump didn't cite a legal justification when he said he'd use the National Guard to conduct mass deportations and create detention camps for people living illegally inside the U.S.
In the end, whether any of Trump's proposals are legal would likely be determined by the courts, including federal judges he appointed.
