Liberty or Laws? -- Militia in Aid of Our Neighbor

[Gary Hunt]

Liberty or Laws?
Militia in Aid of Our Neighbors

Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
July 26, 2014

In the previous article (Militia in Defense of the State), we discussed the right of the People to defend themselves, if Congress, the President, and the governor of their state, all abrogate their responsibility to protect us from invasion.  If the need therein suggested arises, we must first question whether the Congress, the President, or the governor of the state, by abrogating responsibility, allowing a foreign invasion, without challenge, have become "enemies, domestic", along side of the "enemies, foreign".

Regardless of how we perceive those in government who have failed in their responsibilities, the question will arise whether a person from one state has the right to go to another state, in aid of the militia of that second state.  Given the current nature on the ongoing invasion, along the southern border, it would make sense to recognize that Ohio is not in need of immediate aid, though one of the border states (California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas) is.  If someone from Ohio decided that he wished to aid his neighbor in Texas in dealing with the invasion, has he a right to go to their aid, either as an individual, or, as a member of a militia organization?

In a strict sense, and probably also in a lawful sense, the militia organization cannot go as an organization.  Texas Government Code, § 437.209

FOREIGN TROOPS.  A military force from another state, territory, or district, except a force that is on federal orders and acting as a part of the United States armed forces, may not enter this state without the permission of the governor.  The governor may delegate the powers granted by this section to the adjutant general.

specifically forbids a militia unit from another state to enter, absent the permission from the governor or under federal orders.

However, if the members of the Ohio militia organization do choose to go to Texas to aid their neighbor, there is nothing that would prohibit their traveling together to visit the host, whether a property owner or a Texas militia organization, as long as they were going to Texas as individuals.  Well, by what authority, or form of reasoning, do we come to that conclusion?

When the Framers wrote the Constitution, they provided something that had not been true, before that document was ratified.  Had you gone from one state to another, you did not have any of the rights enjoyed by the citizens of that state, unless they gave them to you.  However, the Framers, wishing to assure that any citizen could feel comfortable and safe, while traveling to another state of the Union, made provision so that citizens in one state, while traveling, would enjoy all of the privileges and immunities enjoyed by the citizens of the host state.  The authority can be found in the federal Constitution at Article IV, § 2:

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

Now, if you were visiting Texas, and chose to assist that neighbor state in resisting the invasion of aliens, would it not afford you the "privilege" of joining the militia; and, "immunities" provided by law as a member of that Texas militia -- the same as afforded a Texan?

Your right as a citizen provides the lawful authority to aid your neighbor in repelling an invasion, so long as you enter the host state as a guest, or a visitor, and then decide to enroll in a Texas militia.  The Texas laws and Constitution notwithstanding, the nature of the Union of States under the federal Constitution afford you that protection.

 

This article can be found on line at Liberty or Laws? -- Militia in Aid of Our Neighbor