Kari Lake's Claim of Invasion

By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host

If one was to look up the word “invasion” in the dictionary the definition is “an unwanted encroachment.”  Did the Founding Fathers really mean that persons entering the country in a manner other than as uniformed invaders could be considered an “invasion”?

Is Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake correctly calls illegal aliens invaders, therefore, as per Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution she can use the militia (including the National Guard) to engage in war against those invaders?  The provision in the Constitution reads:

No State shall…engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

As for a State’s authority to protect itself from invasion, and who the Framers believed those invaders may include?  James Madison lays it out in Federalist #43 quite clearly…

A protection against invasion is due from every society to the parts composing it. The latitude of the expression here used seems to secure each State, not only against foreign hostility, but against ambitious or vindictive enterprises of its more powerful neighbors.

 It’s an invasion of ambitious foreigners seeking to undermine our government in ways that reminds me of what the Tories were trying to do.  And, if you go to the Tory Act of 1776 you realize that the Americans were not willing to go soft on the invasion by loyalists to The Crown…so why should we treat illegal aliens who are undermining our system in a way very similar as anything other than invaders?

– Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary