Fact Check: "Troops may have authority to arrest protesters, Slotkin questions Hegseth"
What We Know
During a recent Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, U.S. Senator Elissa Slotkin questioned Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth regarding the authority of military troops to arrest or detain protesters. Slotkin specifically asked whether Hegseth had authorized the military to take such actions against unarmed protesters on U.S. soil (Slotkin Presses Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth). This inquiry arose amid discussions about military deployments in response to civil unrest, particularly in the context of protests following the police killing of George Floyd.
Hegseth's responses during the hearing were notably evasive. He did not directly confirm whether he had given orders allowing the military to arrest or detain protesters but stated that the military could "temporarily detain" individuals if necessary for self-defense, suggesting that such detentions would be handed over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (PBS News).
Slotkin also referenced claims made by former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper, who alleged that President Trump had suggested using lethal force against protesters, a claim Hegseth denied, stating there was "zero indication that an order was given to shoot protesters" (ABC News).
Analysis
The claim that "troops may have authority to arrest protesters" is nuanced and requires careful consideration of Hegseth's statements and the context of military engagement with civilian protests. While Hegseth did not explicitly authorize the military to arrest protesters, his acknowledgment that troops could "temporarily detain" individuals indicates a potential for military involvement in civil law enforcement under specific circumstances. This response raises concerns about the militarization of law enforcement and the appropriate use of military force in domestic situations.
The reliability of the sources is generally high, as they include direct quotes from a Senate hearing and reputable news outlets. However, the interpretation of Hegseth's statements can vary. For instance, while some sources emphasize the lack of a clear order to arrest protesters, others highlight the troubling implications of military involvement in civilian law enforcement (Detroit News, The Hill).
Moreover, the context of Slotkin's questioning—amidst heightened tensions regarding military actions and civil rights—adds layers to the interpretation of Hegseth's responses. The potential for military engagement in civilian protests is a contentious issue, and Slotkin's insistence on clarity reflects broader concerns about civil liberties and the role of the military in domestic affairs.
Conclusion
The claim that "troops may have authority to arrest protesters" is Partially True. While there is no explicit authorization from Hegseth for military troops to arrest protesters, his comments about the potential for temporary detainment under specific circumstances suggest a troubling ambiguity regarding military involvement in civil protests. This reflects ongoing debates about the appropriate boundaries of military authority in domestic situations.
Sources
- VIDEO: Slotkin Presses Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth About Use of Active-Duty Military on Unarmed Protestors
- Slotkin tells Defense Secretary Hegseth to 'be a man' over Trump admin’s military actions - mlive
- WATCH: Hegseth won't say whether he allowed the military to arrest - PBS News
- Democratic senators hammer Hegseth as he trades barbs with them during - ABC News
- Slotkin tells Hegseth to 'be a man,' divulge Los Angeles military order - Detroit News
- Pete Hegseth suggests he would disobey court ruling - The Guardian
- Slotkin to Hegseth: Esper had 'more guts and balls than you' - The Hill
- Senate committee grills Hegseth on protests, Middle East - UPI
