Police request 60-day extension of National Guard security
The Capitol Police have requested that members of the National Guard continue to provide security at the U.S. Capitol for another two months, The Associated Press has learned. Defense officials say the new proposal is being reviewed by the Pentagon.
The request underscores the continuing concerns about security and the potential for violence at the Capitol, two months after rioters breached the building in violence that left five people dead. And it comes as law enforcement was on high alert Thursday around the U.S. Capitol after intelligence uncovered a “possible plot” by a militia group to storm the building.
The potential plot is tied to the far-right conspiracy theory promoted by QAnon supporters that former President Donald Trump would rise again to power on March 4, the original presidential inauguration day.
U.S. Rep. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., said she learned that the request for a 60-day extension was made in the last 36 hours, and that the Guard is now seeking volunteers from states around the country to fill the need. Defense officials confirmed that the request is under review at the Pentagon, and that the Guard has started checking states for availability of their troops, in an effort to be prepared if final Defense Department approval is given. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.
The more than 5,000 Guard members currently in Washington, D.C., are all slated to go home on March 12, ending the mission.
Slotkin said some members of Congress have been concerned about whether there is a solid plan to provide security for members and staff going forward.
“We want to understand what the plan is,” she said. “None of us like looking at the fencing, the gates, the uniformed presence around the Capitol. We can’t depend on the National Guard for our security.”
She said there has to be a plan that provides the needed security for the buildings and personnel by the Capitol Police and local law enforcement. Slotkin said it was telling that House members hastened to complete major votes Wednesday so they wouldn’t have to be in the building where many fled violent rioters Jan. 6. Lawmakers, she said, “don’t feel totally secure” in the Capitol.
U.S. Capitol Police officials have also told congressional leaders the razor-wire topped fencing around the Capitol should remain in place for several more months.
>> With Democrats controlling the presidency and Congress, Republican state lawmakers concerned about the possibility of new federal gun control laws aren’t waiting to react.
Legislation in at least a dozen states seeks to nullify any new restrictions, such as ammunition limits or a ban on certain types of weapons. Some bills would make it a crime for local police officers to enforce federal gun laws.
That can create confusion for officers who often work with federal law enforcement, said Daniel Isom, former chief of the St. Louis Police Department who is now a senior advisor for Everytown for Gun Safety. Federal law plays a big role in some areas, such as keeping guns away from domestic-violence offenders.
Putting local officers in a position to decide which laws to enforce is the last thing police need at the time when cities such as St. Louis are experiencing a rise in violent crime, Isom said.
“This has been an extremely challenging year for both communities and law enforcement, and to ask any more mental strain on officers at this point in time seems to be quite displaced,” he said.
Gun sales also have set monthly records nationwide since the coronavirus pandemic took hold.
Isom is concerned about the Missouri measure passed by the state House that would allow police departments with officers who enforce federal gun laws to be sued and face a $50,000 fine. It is not the first time Missouri has considered such a bill, but supporters pointed to President Joe Biden taking office as a reason to pass it now.
‘Rights’ issue
In Utah, Republican Rep. Cory Maloy also referenced the incoming administration after the state House passed his bill with a similar provision forbidding the enforcement of federal gun laws. Many Republican state lawmakers see attempts to pass federal firearms restrictions as a threat to the Second Amendment.
“We really feel the need to protect those rights,” he said.
Several states passed similar laws under thenpresident Barack Obama, although judges have ruled against them in court. Most of the latest crop of federal nullification proposals focus on police officers inside their states who primarily enforce
state rather than federal laws.
While Biden has called for a ban on assault weapons, any new gun legislation will likely face an uphill climb, given the political polarization that has tripped up past administrations. Democratic lawmakers from conservativeleaning states also could join Republicans in opposing new gun restrictions. Any measures likely to pass would have broad support, like background checks on all gun sales,
said Everytown President John Feinblatt.
Those dynamics haven’t stopped state lawmakers who want to make the first move to protect gun rights in their states. Federal nullification bills have been introduced in more than a dozen other states, including Alabama, Arkansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Wyoming, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, West Virginia and Iowa. In Texas, the governor has called for the state to become a Second Amendment sanctuary.
‘Not going to fly’
In Arizona, a Senate proposal that passed the chamber on Wednesday would allow officers to be sued for enforcing federal gun restrictions that the state considers violations of the Second Amendment. They potentially could face criminal charges. A bill in the
House doesn’t include those punishments, but its sponsor, Republican Rep. Leo Biasiucci, said it would be a clear rejection of federal restrictions on assault-style weapons, high-capacity magazines or other firearms.
“They can do that at a federal level, but in Arizona it’s not going to fly,” he said.
His proposal passed the state House last week over the objections of Democrats including Rep. Daniel Hernandez of Tucson, who was present at the 2011 shooting that severely injured former U.S. Rep. Gabby Giffords. If signed into law, the measure would be unconstitutional and lead to an expensive court fight, he said.
Biasiucci compares his plan to Arizona voters’ move to legalize recreational marijuana, even though it remains against federal law.
Gun-control groups see it differently.
“Guns kill people and are used to create a public safety issue, whereas marijuana is really not,” said Allison Anderman, senior counsel with the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. “What is likely to happen if gun laws are not followed is people get killed as a result.”
Similar measures passed by the Republican Legislature in Montana were vetoed in previous years by the former Democratic governor. Now working with the Republican governor, the state House passed a bill last week to bar state officials from enforcing federal bans on certain firearms, ammunition or magazines.
Under Obama’s presidency, the Legislature passed a law in 2009 that made guns and ammunition manufactured in Montana exempt from federal law. It eventually was struck down in court, but several states still followed with their own nullification measures. In 2013, two Kansas men tried to use that state’s nullification law to overturn their federal convictions for possessing unregistered firearms, but the challenge was rejected.
“The main issue there is the Supremacy Clause,” the part of the Constitution that says federal law supersedes state law, said Jacob Charles, executive director of the Center for Firearms Law at Duke Law School.
Even so, the bills focused on what local police can and can’t do could pass legal muster.
“States have no obligation to enforce federal law,” he said.
Pandemic lockdowns and stay-at-home orders kept many drivers off U.S. roads and highways last year. But those who did venture out found open lanes that only invited reckless driving, leading to the sharp increase in traffic-crash deaths across the country.
The nonprofit National Safety Council estimates in its report issued Thursday that 42,060 people died in vehicle crashes in 2020, an 8% increase over 2019 and the first jump in four years.
Plus, the fatality rate per 100 million miles driven spiked 24%, the largest annual percentage increase since the council began collecting data in 1923.
And even though traffic is now getting close to pre-coronavirus levels, the bad behavior on the roads is continuing, authorities say.
“It’s kind of terrifying what were seeing on our roads,” said Michael Hanson, director of the Minnesota Public Safety Department’s Office of Traffic Safety. “We’re seeing a huge increase in the amount of risk-taking behavior.”
Last year’s deaths were the most since 2007, when 43,945 people were killed in vehicle crashes. In addition, the safety council estimates that 4.8 million people were injured in crashes last year.
Federal data shows that Americans drove 13% fewer miles last year, or roughly 2.8 trillion miles, said Ken Kolosh, the safety council’s manager of statistics. Yet
the number of deaths rose at an alarming rate, he said.
“The pandemic appears to be taking our eyes off the ball when it comes to traffic safety,” Kolosh said.
Of the reckless behaviors, early data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration show speed to be the top factor, Kolosh said. Also, tests of traumacenter patients involved in traffic crashes show increased use of alcohol, marijuana and opiods, he said.
In Minnesota, traffic volumes fell 60% when stayhome orders were issued early in the pandemic last spring. Hanson said state officials expected a corresponding drop in crashes and deaths, but while
crashes declined, deaths increased.
“Almost immediately the fatality rate started to go up, and go up significantly,” Hanson said, adding that his counterparts in other states saw similar increases. “It created less congestion and a lot more lane space for drivers to use, and quite honestly, to abuse out there.”
In late March and early April, the number of speedrelated fatalities more than doubled over the same period in 2019 in the state, Hanson said. Last year, Minnesota recorded 395 traffic deaths, up nearly 9% from 364 in 2019.
Drivers also used the
empty roads to drive extreme speeds. In 2019, the Minnesota State Patrol’s 600 troopers handed out tickets to just over 500 drivers for going over 100 mph. That number rose to 1,068 in 2020, Hanson said.
Traveling over 100 mph makes crashes far more severe, the safety council said.
The high number of speeding drivers is continuing, even as traffic is starting to return to pre-pandemic levels, according to Hanson.
The safety council is calling for equitable enforcement of traffic laws, infrastructure improvements, mandatory ignition switch locks for convicted drunken drivers, reducing speed limits to match roadway designs, and laws banning cellphone use while driving, among other recommendations to stem the deaths.
The council collects fatal-crash data from states on public and private roads. The numbers released on Thursday are preliminary, but every year are only slightly different from the final numbers, Kolosh said.