police action

(noun)

Police action in military/security studies and international relations is a euphemism for a military action undertaken without a formal declaration of war.

Examples of police action in the following topics:

  • Congress

    • Congress is given several powers to engage in foreign policy, but also to check the president's actions foreign policy, especially in the event of war.
    • Instead, they maintain that they have the Constitutional authority, as commander in chief to use the military for "police actions. " According to historian Thomas Woods, "Ever since the Korean, Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution — which refers to the president as the 'Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States' — has been interpreted to mean that the president may act with an essentially free hand in foreign affairs, or at the very least that he may send men into battle without consulting Congress. " Some people have argued this could pass as offensive actions, although historically police actions fell mostly under the purview of protecting embassies, U.S. citizens overseas, and shipping such as the quasi war.
    • Some debate continues about whether the actions are appropriate.
    • Some legal scholars maintain that offensive, non-police military actions, while a quorum can still be convened, taken without a formal Congressional declaration of war is unconstitutional.
    • The police action spiraled into a war-like situation quickly, although it was one war never waged by Congress.

  • Interventionism

    • As 1940 became 1941, the actions of the Roosevelt administration made it more and more clear that the United States was on a course to war.
    • Such forms of interventionism included giving aid to European nations to rebuild , having an active role in the UN, NATO, and police actions around the world, and involving the CIA in several coup take overs in Latin America and the Middle East.

  • The Exclusionary Rule

    • The exclusionary rule is also designed to provide disincentive to prosecutors and police who illegally gather evidence in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the Bill of Rights.
    • In strict cases, when an illegal action is used by police/prosecution to gain any incriminating result, all evidence whose recovery stemmed from the illegal action can be thrown out from a jury.

  • [PF content: Federal Policing and Intelligence Agencies]

  • The Miranda Warning

    • The Miranda warning is a statement read by police to criminal suspects that asserts their right to counsel and right to remain silent.
    • Miranda was not informed of his rights prior to the police interrogation.
    • However, in the pragmatic interactions between police and citizens, this is rarely true.
    • The police must immediately cease all interrogation and the police cannot reinitiate interrogation unless counsel is present (merely consulting with counsel is insufficient) or the defendant contacts the police on his own volition.
    • Describe the Miranda Rights and the obligations they impose on police

  • Sunshine Laws

    • If "agency personnel acted arbitrarily or capriciously with respect to the withholding, [a] Special Counsel shall promptly initiate a proceeding to determine whether disciplinary action is warranted against the officer or employee who was primarily responsible for the withholding."
    • Hoover is credited with building the FBI into a large and efficient crime-fighting agency, and with instituting a number of modernizations to police technology, such as a centralized fingerprint file and forensic laboratories.

  • From Political Values to Ideology

    • The events of 9/11 ignited Americans' patriotic values, resulting in many public displays of support for the country, its democratic form of government, and authority figures in public-service jobs, such as police and firefighters.
    • The emphasis on the lone, powerful person implies a distrust of collective action and of power structures such as big government, big business, or big labor.

  • State Initiatives Against Affirmative Action

    • States and the federal government have argued about the appropriate implementation of affirmative action policies.
    • Duke Power Company, the first court case to assess affirmative action in employment that made it to the Supreme Court in 1971, states took action to limit the application of affirmative action programs in their jurisdictions.
    • Opponents to affirmative action have been even more vociferous about the use of affirmative action in higher education than when affirmative action pertains to employment policies.
    • Since the implementation of state policies resisting affirmative action programs, the federal government has pushed back to ensure that affirmative action policies are implemented.
    • State referenda have been the most successful way for opponents of affirmative action to limit its reach.

  • [PF content: The Legislative Branch in Action]

  • [PF content: The Executive Branch in Action]