By the way, did not notice this until after I titled and posted this, I put Coast Guard when I meant to put National Guard. LOL
In another thread, I was defending a point using references from the US Constitution and I came into the realization on something I had never noticed before. In the US Constitution Article 2, it states that the President is the Commander in Chief over the Army and the Navy and states militia. Now here is my question ... so where does the Marines and National Guard fall in that. If it falls under "states militia" (and by states militia I am assuming that the militia is the police) then the states are in violation of the constitution because by constitutional law states can not create a military of their own. The military can only be created on a federal level. So by this information, the Marines are not under the direction of the President and (unless they fall under Armies, but then why are militia and Navy mentioned separately?) congress has no hand in the Marines or National Guard. Can someone please explain this?
In another thread, I was defending a point using references from the US Constitution and I came into the realization on something I had never noticed before. In the US Constitution Article 2, it states that the President is the Commander in Chief over the Army and the Navy and states militia. Now here is my question ... so where does the Marines and National Guard fall in that. If it falls under "states militia" (and by states militia I am assuming that the militia is the police) then the states are in violation of the constitution because by constitutional law states can not create a military of their own. The military can only be created on a federal level. So by this information, the Marines are not under the direction of the President and (unless they fall under Armies, but then why are militia and Navy mentioned separately?) congress has no hand in the Marines or National Guard. Can someone please explain this?