So, if I'm understanding this correctly, inre your highlighted section, the beasts would be trying to use the "enforce federal authority" part of that (with respect to alleged records-keeping procedures), but still it would need to be authorized by either Congress or the Potatus (the resident acting as the President), neither of which, to the best of our knowledge, occurred.

Edit: I have no idea what 10 U.S.C. Sections 251-255 cover.

Edit2: And in any case, it appears they've grossly overstepped their bounds by not involving state authorities and relegating themselves to a support role. In the Dong case he had to appeal all the way up to the SC. My guess is they'll toss Garland (or whoever signed off on this M-A-L raid) under the bus as they did the "rogue DCIS agent" in the Dong case.

So, if I'm understanding this correctly, inre your highlighted section, the beasts would be trying to use the "enforce federal authority" part of that (with respect to alleged records-keeping procedures), but still it would need to be authorized by either Congress or the Potatus (the resident acting as the President), neither of which, to the best of our knowledge, occurred.

Edit: I have no idea what 10 U.S.C. Sections 251-255 cover.

Edit2: And in any case, it appears they've grossly overstepped their bounds by not involving state authorities and relegating themselves to a support role. In the Dong case he had to appeal all the way up to the SC. My guess is they'll toss Garland (or whoever signed off on this) under the bus as they did the "rogue DCIS agent" in the Dong case.

So, if I'm understanding this correctly, inre your highlighted section, the beasts would be trying to use the "enforce federal authority" part of that (with respect to alleged records-keeping procedures), but still it would need to be authorized by either Congress or the Potatus (the resident acting as the President), neither of which, to the best of our knowledge, occurred.

Edit: I have no idea what 10 U.S.C. Sections 251-255 cover.