Last updated 4 months ago. Our resources are updated regularly but please keep in mind that links, programs, policies, and contact information do change.
The U.S. military is built to fight enemies abroad, not police streets at home. This principle runs deep in American history—so deep that when Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans in 2005, it took days to mobilize the massive federal response that ultimately saved thousands of lives. When COVID-19 struck, National Guard units found themselves running vaccination sites and food banks rather than training for combat.
These domestic deployments represent one of the most powerful yet misunderstood functions of the U.S. government. They operate on a fundamental tension between America’s historical aversion to using military force on its own soil and the reality that the Department of Defense possesses unique capabilities essential for responding to catastrophic crises at home.
This domestic role has two main pillars: Homeland Defense—protecting U.S. territory from external attack—and Defense Support of Civil Authorities—assisting civilian agencies during major emergencies.
Understanding when, why, and how the American military becomes the nation’s shield requires grasping the specific laws, organizations, and real-world applications that govern these extraordinary circumstances.
The Legal Foundation: Why Military Action at Home is Restricted
The use of the U.S. military within its own borders isn’t an arbitrary decision but is governed by strict and complex legal frameworks. This system is built upon a foundational principle of restriction, with specific, high-stakes exceptions carved out by Congress for extraordinary circumstances.
The default is prohibition on military involvement in civilian law enforcement—a principle deeply rooted in American history. The exceptions are carefully defined statutes that permit military action only when normal functions of civil government break down.
The Posse Comitatus Act: The Bedrock Restriction
The primary law limiting the military’s domestic role is the Posse Comitatus Act, a federal statute passed in 1878. The law states that anyone who “willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws” faces fines or up to two years in prison, except when “expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress.”
This law’s origin ties to the end of the Reconstruction era, when Congress sought to prevent federal troops from being used for routine law enforcement in former Confederate states. However, its roots go deeper, reflecting long-standing American tradition inherited from England that abhors military interference in civilian affairs.
This sentiment was a key grievance in the Declaration of Independence, which condemned the King for having “kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the consent of our legislatures,” and for seeking to “render the Military independent of and superior to the civil power.”
In practice, the Act prohibits the military from performing direct law enforcement functions. Case law has established that “executing the law” occurs when Armed Forces perform tasks assigned to civilian government bodies or perform tasks solely for civilian government purposes.
This distinction is critical: indirect support, such as providing equipment, intelligence, or training to civilian law enforcement, is often permissible. Direct action, such as making arrests, conducting searches, or seizing property from civilians, is generally forbidden unless specific exceptions apply.
The Act explicitly names the Army and Air Force. While the Navy and Marine Corps aren’t mentioned, DoD policy extends the spirit and restrictions to them as well. The Coast Guard, which operates under the Department of Homeland Security and has a dual military and law enforcement mission, is statutorily exempt from the Posse Comitatus Act.
The National Guard is subject to the Act’s restrictions only when called into federal service (federalized). When operating under state governor command, the National Guard isn’t bound by the Act.
Crucially, the law’s own text provides the key to its exceptions: “except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress.” This clause serves as a legal gateway, allowing military use when other specific federal laws, such as the Insurrection Act, are invoked.
The Insurrection Act: When Order Breaks Down
The Insurrection Act of 1807 is one of the most significant statutory exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act. This law grants the President authority to deploy federal troops and federalized National Guard forces within the United States to suppress rebellion or enforce federal laws when ordinary judicial proceedings are insufficient.
The Act outlines three distinct scenarios for its invocation:
At a State’s Request: The President may deploy forces upon formal request of a state’s legislature, or its governor if the legislature cannot convene, to help suppress insurrection against that state’s government.
To Enforce Federal Law: The President may act unilaterally if he considers that “unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States” make it impracticable to enforce federal laws in any state through the court system.
To Protect Constitutional Rights: The President may deploy troops if insurrection, domestic violence, or conspiracy in a state so hinders execution of laws that a portion of the population is deprived of their constitutional rights, and state authorities are unable, fail, or refuse to protect those rights. This provision, added after the Civil War, explicitly states that such situations constitute denial of “equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.” This was the authority President Eisenhower invoked to send troops to Little Rock, Arkansas, in 1957 to enforce school desegregation orders.
Before using military force under the Insurrection Act, the President is required by law to first issue a proclamation, ordering insurgents to disperse and return to their homes peaceably within limited time.
The Stafford Act: Responding to Catastrophe
While the Insurrection Act addresses breakdowns in law and order, the primary legal framework for federal response to natural disasters and other major emergencies is the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act. First passed in 1988, the Stafford Act creates orderly and systematic means of providing federal assistance when events overwhelm capabilities of state, tribal, and local governments.
The process typically begins when governors of affected states formally request federal assistance from the President. These requests must detail event severity and state and local resources already committed to responses.
Based on these requests, the President can issue two types of declarations:
Emergency Declaration: This can be declared for any event where federal assistance is needed to save lives, protect property and public health and safety, or lessen or avert threats of catastrophe. It authorizes more limited ranges of federal assistance, primarily for “Emergency Work” such as debris removal and emergency protective measures like providing medical care or setting up shelters. Emergencies can be declared even before disasters strike, such as in anticipation of hurricanes making landfall, to allow pre-positioning of federal assets.
Major Disaster Declaration: This is reserved for catastrophic events of such severity and magnitude that they warrant wider ranges of federal assistance. Major disaster declarations unlock more comprehensive aid, including funding for “Permanent Work” to repair or replace public infrastructure like roads, bridges, and utilities, as well as Individual Assistance programs that provide direct financial aid and services to affected households.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency is the lead federal agency responsible for coordinating overall responses under the Stafford Act. A crucial provision authorizes FEMA to direct other federal agencies, including the Department of Defense, to use their available personnel, equipment, and resources to support relief efforts. This authority is the legal foundation for the vast majority of military support operations seen during natural disasters like hurricanes, floods, and earthquakes.
The Stafford Act’s flexibility has allowed its application to expand beyond traditional natural disasters. It’s been invoked for terrorist attacks like the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, and more recently, for wide arrays of public health crises. These include the West Nile virus outbreak in 2000, the Flint water contamination crisis in 2016, and most significantly, the COVID-19 pandemic, which led to the first-ever major disaster declarations for an infectious disease across all 50 states.
This evolution demonstrates that as new forms of large-scale crises emerge, the Stafford Act remains the primary legal vehicle for mobilizing whole-of-government responses, with the DoD playing vital supporting roles.
Mission Definitions: Who’s in Charge and When
Within the Department of Defense and broader U.S. government, specific terms define the military’s domestic roles. These terms—Homeland Defense, Homeland Security, and Defense Support of Civil Authorities—aren’t interchangeable. They represent distinct missions with different lead agencies and legal authorities.
Public confusion over these terms is common, yet understanding their precise meanings is key to knowing who’s in charge and when during domestic crises. The single most important factor is determining whether the DoD is the lead agency or supporting agency, as this dictates its entire operational posture.
Homeland Defense: Defending Against External Threats
Homeland Defense is a core military mission. The official DoD definition is “the protection of U.S. sovereignty, territory, domestic population, and critical defense infrastructure against external threats and aggression, or other threats as directed by the President.”
The crucial element is the term “external threats.” Homeland Defense missions counter attacks originating from outside the United States. In these scenarios, the Department of Defense is the lead federal agency. The military is in charge, acting proactively to defeat enemies.
Classic examples of Homeland Defense include:
- Intercepting enemy bombers or fighter jets approaching U.S. airspace
- Using missile defense systems to shoot down ballistic missiles launched by foreign powers
- Countering attacks from the sea against U.S. territory
Homeland Security: A National Effort Led by DHS
Homeland Security is a much broader concept. The official U.S. government definition is “a concerted national effort to prevent terrorist attacks within the United States, reduce America’s vulnerability to terrorism, and minimize damage and recover from attacks that do occur.”
This mission encompasses wide ranges of hazards, from terrorism to natural disasters to cybersecurity. The Department of Homeland Security, created in 2002, is the lead federal agency for this national effort. The DoD is a critical partner and plays supporting roles within the larger Homeland Security enterprise, but it doesn’t lead it. For example, while DHS is responsible for securing the nation’s borders, the DoD may provide support to that mission.
Defense Support of Civil Authorities: The Military as Supporting Partner
Defense Support of Civil Authorities is the framework through which the DoD provides assistance to civilian governments during domestic incidents. The official definition is “Support provided by U.S. Federal military forces, DOD civilians, DOD contract personnel… in response to requests for assistance from civil authorities for domestic emergencies, law enforcement support, and other domestic activities.”
Under DSCA, the DoD is always in supporting roles to civilian lead agencies. The military doesn’t act on its own initiative; it responds to formal Requests for Assistance from other parts of government, such as FEMA during hurricanes or the Department of Justice during special events.
Every Request for Assistance is carefully vetted according to six criteria laid out in DoD Directive 3025.18:
Legality: Is the requested support compliant with all laws, including the Posse Comitatus Act?
Lethality: Is there potential for use of lethal force by or against DoD personnel? Requests involving potential lethality receive the highest level of scrutiny.
Risk: What is the safety risk to military forces who would be providing support?
Cost: Who will reimburse the DoD for support, and what is the impact on the defense budget?
Appropriateness: Is this a mission the military should be doing, or can it be better handled by civilian agencies or the private sector?
Readiness: What is the impact on the military’s ability to perform its primary warfighting missions?
This final criterion, Readiness, highlights fundamental tension within the DoD. The military doesn’t have units or budgets specifically set aside for DSCA; it provides these capabilities using its active warfighting forces. Every helicopter used for search and rescue is one not available for combat training exercises. This creates constant balancing acts for DoD leadership, as prolonged or extensive DSCA missions can potentially divert resources from training and degrade military readiness for core global missions.
A critical exception within the DSCA framework is Immediate Response Authority. In “imminently serious conditions” where there’s no time to get formal approval from higher headquarters—such as sudden bridge collapses with trapped survivors—local military commanders are authorized to respond immediately to civilian requests to save lives, prevent human suffering, or mitigate great property damage. These responses are temporary and must be reported up chains of command as soon as possible.
| Feature | Homeland Defense (HD) | Homeland Security (HS) | Defense Support of Civil Authorities (DSCA) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead Agency | Department of Defense | Department of Homeland Security | Civilian Agency (e.g., FEMA, DOJ, HHS) |
| Mission Focus | Protecting U.S. territory from external threats and aggression | Preventing terrorism and enhancing security against all domestic hazards | Providing support during domestic emergencies when requested by civilian authorities |
| DoD’s Role | Leads military defense of the nation | Supports national effort led by DHS | Supports civilian lead agency; acts only when requested and approved |
The Command Structure: Organizations That Defend the Homeland
Executing the complex missions of Homeland Defense and Civil Support requires specialized command structures. This architecture was deliberately designed after the September 11, 2001 attacks to address the new reality that the U.S. homeland was no longer a sanctuary from foreign threats.
U.S. Northern Command: The Domestic Warfighter
Prior to 9/11, no single military commander was charged with overall defense of the U.S. homeland. The attacks revealed this as a critical vulnerability. In response, U.S. Northern Command was established on October 1, 2002.
Headquartered at Peterson Space Force Base in Colorado, USNORTHCOM is the geographic combatant command whose Area of Responsibility includes the continental United States, Alaska, Canada, Mexico, and surrounding sea and air approaches. Its mission is twofold and directly reflects the DoD’s domestic roles:
- To conduct Homeland Defense by deterring, preventing, and defeating threats and aggression aimed at the United States
- To serve as the DoD’s primary synchronizer for Defense Support of Civil Authorities
USNORTHCOM has very few permanently assigned forces. Instead, when missions arise—whether hurricane responses or homeland defense operations—forces from all military branches are assigned to USNORTHCOM’s command for the duration of specific operations.
North American Aerospace Defense Command: The Eyes in the Sky
Operating in close coordination with USNORTHCOM, and sharing the same commander, is the North American Aerospace Defense Command. NORAD is a unique bi-national military command, a partnership between the United States and Canada established in 1958 during the Cold War to defend against Soviet bombers.
Today, NORAD’s mission has evolved and centers on three core functions:
Aerospace Warning: Using global networks of satellites and ground-based radars, NORAD detects and provides warning of any potential attacks against North America, whether by aircraft, missiles, or space vehicles.
Aerospace Control: This is the mission of ensuring air sovereignty over the U.S. and Canada. NORAD uses networks of fighter jets on alert, ready to scramble and intercept any unknown, unwanted, or unauthorized aircraft in North American airspace. The 9/11 attacks highlighted the critical importance of this internal-facing mission, which is now conducted continuously under Operation Noble Eagle.
Maritime Warning: Added in 2006, this mission involves sharing information and awareness of activities in maritime approaches to the U.S. and Canada to identify potential threats from the sea.
The National Guard: Citizen-Soldiers with Dual Roles
The National Guard is a unique component of the U.S. military, composed of citizen-soldiers and airmen who typically hold civilian jobs but train part-time. The Guard’s defining characteristic is its dual status:
State Control: Most of the time, National Guard units are under command of their respective state or territorial governors. In this status (State Active Duty or Title 32 status), they can be called upon to respond to state-level emergencies like floods, wildfires, or civil disturbances. When operating under state command, they’re not restricted by the Posse Comitatus Act.
Federal Control: The President has authority to federalize the National Guard, placing them on active duty in Title 10 status. When this occurs, they become part of federal military forces, under Presidential command and subject to the Posse Comitatus Act.
This dual-command structure can create challenges during large-scale disasters where both state-controlled Guard forces and federally-controlled active-duty forces are responding in the same areas. To solve this, the DoD developed an innovative command structure known as the Dual-Status Commander.
First used during the G-8 Summit in 2004 and formally authorized in the 2011 National Defense Authorization Act, a DSC is a single military officer (typically a National Guard general) who is legally empowered to command both state forces (Title 32) and federal forces (Title 10) simultaneously.
This arrangement, which requires approval of both state governors and the Secretary of Defense, creates unity of effort and ensures seamless coordination between state and federal military assets. The DSC is a clever operational solution to a constitutional dilemma; it respects separate state and federal chains of command by having commanders report to governors for state forces and to USNORTHCOM commanders for federal forces, while allowing unified and efficient responses on the ground.
Modern Domains of Homeland Defense
The concept of defending the U.S. homeland is no longer limited to stopping ships and planes at the water’s edge. In the 21st century, threats can emerge from across the globe in minutes or traverse the planet at the speed of light. In response, the DoD’s Homeland Defense mission has evolved to operate across multiple, complex domains: air and missile, land, and cyberspace.
This reveals a fundamental shift in U.S. defensive strategy: the homeland is no longer a sanctuary protected by oceans, and its defense must be layered, proactive, and global.
Air and Missile Defense: A Layered Shield
The United States faces growing threats from ballistic missiles, which can travel at immense speeds over vast distances, and from increasingly sophisticated cruise missiles and unmanned aerial systems. The U.S. strategy for missile defense isn’t designed to stop massive, all-out nuclear attacks from peer competitors like Russia or China; that scenario is addressed by the nation’s strategic nuclear deterrent.
Instead, the U.S. Ballistic Missile Defense System is designed to provide defense against limited ballistic missile strikes from rogue states like North Korea and Iran, and to protect against regional threats to U.S. forces and allies. The goal is “deterrence by denial”—to create uncertainty in adversaries’ minds that their attacks would succeed.
The BMDS is an integrated, layered architecture that provides multiple opportunities to intercept incoming missiles during their flight paths. Key systems include:
Ground-based Midcourse Defense: This is the nation’s primary defense against long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles. It consists of 44 ground-based interceptors located at Fort Greely, Alaska, and Vandenberg Space Force Base, California. These interceptors are designed to launch into space and destroy incoming warheads during “midcourse” phases of their trajectories, while coasting above the atmosphere.
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense: This highly capable system deployed on U.S. Navy cruisers and destroyers, as well as in land-based “Aegis Ashore” sites in Europe. Using Standard Missile-3 and Standard Missile-6 interceptors, the Aegis system can shoot down short-, medium-, and intermediate-range ballistic missiles. While primarily used to defend allies and forward-deployed forces, Aegis ships also form critical parts of global sensor networks that track threats to the homeland.
Terminal High Altitude Area Defense: THAAD is a mobile, rapidly deployable system designed to intercept short- and medium-range ballistic missiles in their final, or “terminal,” phases of flight as they re-enter the atmosphere. THAAD batteries provide broad area defense for critical assets and population centers.
Patriot Advanced Capability-3: The Patriot system is a terminal-phase air and missile defense system that provides final, lower-tier protective layers. It works in conjunction with THAAD to defend against tactical ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and hostile aircraft.
Land Defense: Securing the Borders
The DoD’s role on the U.S. southern border has traditionally been a clear example of Defense Support of Civil Authorities. For years, military personnel have supported the Department of Homeland Security and its components, like Customs and Border Protection, with missions such as aerial surveillance, engineering support for fence and road construction, logistics, and transportation.
However, in recent years, this mission has undergone significant conceptual shifts, increasingly being framed as Homeland Defense issues. A 2025 presidential memorandum directed the Armed Forces to undertake military missions of “sealing the southern border” and “repelling invasions.”
To facilitate this, the memorandum directed transfer of jurisdiction over certain federal lands along the border to the DoD, creating “national defense areas.” This designation allows service members to operate with greater authority, similar to how they would defend any other military installation.
This reframing represents substantial evolution, moving border missions away from simply supporting civilian law enforcement (DSCA) and toward military-led missions of defending the nation’s territory from what is defined as external threats (HD). This blurring of lines between traditionally separate concepts of defense and security raises complex legal and policy questions about appropriate use of military forces for functions historically handled by civilian agencies.
Cybersecurity: Defending in the Virtual Domain
The digital domain has become a critical front for national defense. The DoD, along with America’s critical infrastructure—including power grids, financial systems, and transportation networks—is heavily dependent on cyberspace and is a constant target for state and non-state actors seeking to steal data, disrupt services, or conduct destructive attacks.
To lead military operations in this domain, the DoD established U.S. Cyber Command. USCYBERCOM is a unified combatant command responsible for directing operation and defense of all DoD networks (the “.mil” domain) and, when authorized, conducting full-spectrum military cyberspace operations.
A cornerstone of the DoD’s cyber strategy is the concept of “defend forward.” This is a proactive approach to defense. Instead of building passive digital walls and waiting for attacks to hit U.S. networks, “defend forward” involves U.S. military cyber operators actively working within adversary networks abroad.
The goal is to observe malicious activity, understand adversary tactics, and, when necessary, disrupt or halt cyberattacks at their sources, before they can threaten the United States. This strategy is the virtual equivalent of projecting power globally; it engages threats far from the homeland to prevent harm at home.
The responsibility for U.S. cybersecurity is divided. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, part of DHS, is the lead federal agency for protecting the nation’s civilian critical infrastructure. The DoD’s role is threefold:
- Defend its own networks (a HD mission)
- Defend the nation from significant cyberattacks of foreign origin (a HD mission)
- Support CISA by sharing intelligence and providing technical expertise when requested (a DSCA mission)
A major cyberattack on the U.S. by a foreign power could simultaneously be a crime investigated by the FBI, an infrastructure failure managed by CISA, and an act of aggression countered by the DoD, illustrating complex, overlapping authorities in this modern warfighting domain.
Civil Support in Action: Real-World Examples
The legal frameworks and command structures that govern the military’s domestic role are best understood through real-world examples. These case studies of Defense Support of Civil Authorities missions show how the DoD’s unique capabilities are applied in times of crisis.
They reveal that in domestic emergencies, the military’s greatest value often lies not in its combat power, but in its unparalleled ability to provide logistics, engineering, transportation, and organization on scales no other single entity can match. These examples also consistently show that while active-duty forces are powerful backstops, the National Guard is the true workhorse and primary military first responder for domestic crises.
Natural Disasters: Hurricane Katrina (2005)
The devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina in August 2005, and subsequent failure of levees in New Orleans, led to catastrophic breakdown of civil order and infrastructure. The scale of disaster overwhelmed local and state responders, triggering one of the largest domestic military responses in American history.
More than 50,000 National Guard members from across the country were mobilized, joined by over 22,000 active-duty personnel under USNORTHCOM command.
Military forces performed vast arrays of life-saving and stabilizing DSCA missions:
Search and Rescue: National Guard and active-duty helicopter crews and boat teams rescued thousands of residents stranded by floodwaters. By the end of September 2005, Guard members alone had saved over 17,000 lives.
Logistics and Supply: The military airlifted and trucked in massive quantities of essential supplies. Guard units moved roughly 18,000 tons of food, water, and relief aid.
Medical Support: Military medical personnel provided emergency treatment to the injured and sick.
Evacuation: Forces were instrumental in evacuating tens of thousands of people from desperate situations, including chaotic scenes at the New Orleans Superdome and Convention Center. Guard aircrews airlifted more than 88,000 passengers to safety.
Security and Order: In New Orleans, where civil authority had collapsed, National Guard troops provided crucial security presence, restoring order and allowing relief efforts to proceed safely.
The response to Katrina, while ultimately massive, was initially hampered by confusion in command and control between state and federal entities. Lessons learned from this chaotic experience directly led to improvements in DSCA doctrine and wider adoption and formalization of the Dual-Status Commander model to ensure better unity of effort in future disasters.
Public Health Crises: The COVID-19 Pandemic
The COVID-19 pandemic prompted the largest and longest domestic mobilization of the National Guard in U.S. history. Across all 50 states, three territories, and the District of Columbia, governors activated their Guard units to support public health efforts. The missions were diverse and often non-traditional, showcasing the Guard’s adaptability:
Medical Support: Guard members, including those with civilian medical training, staffed thousands of COVID-19 testing sites and later, mass vaccination centers. They also provided non-clinical support in overwhelmed hospitals and long-term care facilities. In New York alone, service members administered over 4 million vaccines.
Logistics: The Guard was the logistical backbone of responses in many states, distributing enormous quantities of personal protective equipment, test kits, and food from community food banks.
Specialized Skills: Service members with civilian expertise were put to use in unique ways. In New York, Guard members with backgrounds in data science worked alongside public health officials to model pandemic trends, helping to direct resources more effectively.
Mortuary Affairs: In the pandemic’s darkest days, Guard members were called upon to assist local medical examiners with dignified recovery of the deceased.
Wildfires: The California National Guard Response
In states prone to wildfires, particularly California, the National Guard provides critical support through long-standing and well-integrated partnerships with state civilian firefighting agencies like CAL FIRE. This collaboration allows the military to bring specialized capabilities to the fight.
Missions performed by the California National Guard include:
Aerial Firefighting: CalGuard operates large C-130 aircraft equipped with Modular Airborne Firefighting Systems, which can drop thousands of gallons of fire retardant, as well as helicopters used for precision water drops.
Hand Crews: The Guard provides trained and disciplined ground crews, such as those in the dedicated “Joint Task Force Rattlesnake,” who work under CAL FIRE’s direction to construct fire breaks, clear fuel, and mop up hot spots.
Reconnaissance and Damage Assessment: Aircraft are used for reconnaissance flights to map fire perimeters and assess damage in burned areas.
Security and Traffic Control: In evacuated areas, Guard members staff traffic control points to ensure resident safety and prevent looting, allowing civilian law enforcement to focus on other priorities.
The Balance Between Security and Liberty
The Department of Defense’s domestic role represents one of the most carefully balanced aspects of American government. The tension between providing security and preserving civil liberties is built into every law, every command structure, and every deployment decision.
This balance isn’t accidental—it’s the product of centuries of American political development, informed by both the founders’ fears of military tyranny and the hard-learned lessons of modern crises that overwhelm civilian capabilities.
Understanding this domestic role helps citizens comprehend when they might see uniformed service members in their communities and why. Whether responding to hurricanes, supporting pandemic responses, or defending against missile attacks, the military’s domestic missions are governed by strict legal frameworks designed to ensure that America’s defenders never become its oppressors.
The next time you see National Guard members distributing aid after a disaster or read about missile defense systems protecting American cities, you’ll understand the complex legal and organizational machinery that makes these responses possible while preserving the civilian control of the military that is fundamental to American democracy.
In an era of evolving threats—from cyber attacks to climate-driven disasters to global pandemics—the military’s domestic role will likely continue adapting. But the underlying principle remains constant: the extraordinary capabilities of the Department of Defense will be brought to bear at home only when civilian authorities request help, only within strict legal boundaries, and only in service of protecting the American people and their way of life.
Our articles make government information more accessible. Please consult a qualified professional for financial, legal, or health advice specific to your circumstances.
