DON'T USE MILITARY IN DOMESTIC SPHERE

Under the guise of fighting terrorism, Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge
suggests using the military for domestic law enforcement. But any move to
further blur the line between the civilian and military spheres is
unnecessary and ill-advised.

The historic barrier already has begun to erode as the military becomes
more involved along borders with drug interdiction and illegal immigration.
The Reconstruction-era law, known as Posse Comitatus, bans the Army, Navy,
Air Force and Marines from arresting civilians, making seizures or
conducting civilian searches.

The posting of federal troops at polls in several Southern states during
the contested election of 1876 led to the law, which limits the military's
role in the civilian sector. But the tradition goes beyond those troubled
times to the constitutional separation of civilian and military authority.

Civilian law enforcement is local in character with less emphasis on force
while the military makes few allowances for individual rights. Training
regimes are starkly different. The military's goal is a well-oiled fighting
machine to protect national security under the direction of a civilian
president. Community-based policing, on the other hand, conveys an image of
public service as well as protecting the citizenry.

On middle ground are the Coast Guard and the National Guard. Increasingly,
the Coast Guard, administered by the U.S. Transportation Department in
peacetime, maintains a quasi-military presence by patrolling coastlines for
drug smugglers and assisting pleasure boaters and commercial ships.
National Guard personnel, under control of state governors, often are the
first to deal with civil disobedience and coordinate assistance during
natural disasters.

In the aftermath of Sept. 11, Guard troops filled a gaping void by
patrolling the nation's airports. Both agencies are far better suited for
assignments in close quarters with civilians than other military branches.

Military involvement in the civilian sector doesn't come without
controversy. Federal troops in the 1950s and '60s enforced court orders
calling for racial integration of schools in some Southern states after
local authorities refused to act. In 1986, President Reagan assigned
military personnel to replace striking air controllers until replacements
were trained. Hundreds of federal troops now patrol the border with Mexico.

Nonetheless, direct military involvement with civilian agencies should be
limited to training and providing costly high-tech equipment. Instead of
expanding the military's home-front role, why not make a greater commitment
to civilian agencies, both state and federal, who already have those
responsibilities?

With adequate resources, they can do the job.