President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and Vice President Kamala D. Harris stand with U.S. Army Major General Omar J. Jones IV, commanding general, Joint Task Force–National Capital Region, at the U.S. Capitol during the passing of the Army Band, “Pershing’s Own,” in Washington, D.C., on 20 January 2021. (Credit: SPC Josue Patricio)
Practice Notes
Noon on the 20th Day of January
A Legal Advisor’s Perspective on the 59th Presidential Inauguration
By Lieutenant Colonel Micah W. Elggren, Major Brian M. Shust, & Captain Ravi R. Doshi
This is America’s day. This is democracy’s day. A day of history and
hope. Of renewal and resolve.1
Every four years, at noon on the 20th day of January, the eyes of the world turn to the west front of the U.S. Capitol to witness the swearing-in ceremony for the President of the United States.2 The ceremony on 20 January 2021, however, looked different from years past: a limited audience of dignitaries sat physically distanced while wearing masks. The National Mall, empty of its usual crowds, was stained by nearly 200,000 flags representing lives lost because of the coronavirus pandemic. Over 20,000 National Guard troops kept watch over the Capitol Building still under repair from a deadly assault. And, most notably, the President’s oath was preceded by the swearing-in of Vice President Kamala Harris, who was the first woman, first Black American, and first South Asian American to be elected to the office.
For viewers at home on 20 January 2021, the presence and prominence of Department of Defense (DoD) personnel at the inauguration was undeniable—from escorting luminaries to marching a pass and review, from orchestra performances to consequence management—over 2,000 military and DoD civilian personnel participated in this momentous event.3 As judge advocates, we had a front row seat to this historic moment (not to mention the countless months of planning leading up to Inauguration Day), while providing the legal support that accompanies and enables such a massive effort.4 The following article is a reflection on our time as legal advisors for the 59th Presidential Inauguration.
Legal Foundations: DoD Support to the Presidential Inauguration
To allow their new system of government to endure, the Framers of our Constitution understood that innovative ideas and personalities must regularly be introduced into government; they also understood the need for the peaceful transfer of power.5 To facilitate the timely transition between presidential administrations, the Twentieth Amendment provides that each presidential term will end at noon on 20 January, and the term of the successor administration will begin upon the president’s swearing of the oath found in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution.6
Since 1789, when the military escorted President-elect George Washington to Federal Hall in New York City to be sworn in as the first president of the United States, DoD personnel have played an integral role in supporting presidential inaugurations.7
Over time, the traditional DoD role has been codified into federal law
at 10 U.S.C. § 2553, which authorizes the Secretary of Defense to support presidential inaugurations, including through 1) engaging in activities related to security and safety; 2) executing ceremonial events; 3) loaning property; and 4) providing any other assistance the Secretary considers appropriate.8 Many DoD components help execute inauguration support and are led at the tactical and operational level by the commanding general of Joint Task Force–National Capital Region (JTF–NCR)9
from Fort Lesley J. McNair in Washington, D.C.
For the 2021 inauguration, the commander of U.S. Northern Command
(USNORTHCOM) stood up10 JTF–NCR to plan, coordinate, and execute all DoD ceremonial support to the inauguration in a manner consistent with Ceremonial Support Guidelines (Ceremonial Guidelines) issued by the Secretary of Defense.11 Moreover, JTF–NCR served as the official liaison to the Presidential Inaugural Committee (PIC) (a committee appointed by the President-Elect to organize ceremonial events, performances, and receptions on and around Inauguration Day)12 and the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies (JCCIC) (the group of key leaders from the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives who provide support for the swearing-in ceremony and other events at the Capitol on Inauguration Day).13 Joint Task Force–National Capital Region was, therefore, primarily responsible for ensuring the ceremonial excellence of DoD participation in the inauguration.14 Although USNORTHCOM authorized JTF–NCR to support the Secret Service for consequence management15 if necessary,16 inauguration security support remained a civilian law enforcement function under the framework of a national special security event.17
Also, at the direction of the USNORTHCOM commander, JTF–NCR assisted the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) with transporting
the former administration’s presidential records from the White House
complex to NARA facilities.18
Against this backdrop, JTF–NCR’s inauguration legal team ensured that any DoD support to the inauguration occurred in accordance with the law and DoD policies and regulations.19 Beginning eight months before Inauguration Day, our legal team engaged with hundreds of stakeholders within JTF–NCR, across DoD, and from state, district, and federal agencies—often relying on virtual meetings in light of the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Ultimately, our legal team provided a full range of legal support—across all functional areas—to help ensure DoD’s safe, successful, and legal execution of the 59th Presidential Inauguration.
Our Inauguration Legal Team: Unity of Effort Across Legal Objectives
For those of us assigned to the JTF–NCR inauguration legal team—which included two active duty Air Force majors and a reservist Army captain and sergeant—the role of legal advisor provided us with unique opportunities to learn, and challenges to overcome, as we helped execute DoD’s highly visible participation in the inauguration. Thankfully, because we conducted our work for JTF–NCR under the existing office of the staff judge advocate at Joint Force Headquarters–National Capital Region/U.S. Army Military District of Washington, we had access to the expert support and resources of a high-functioning legal team, which we relied upon on regularly. Indeed, weekly touchpoints with Colonel Thomas E. Schiffer, staff judge advocate, and confabs with the legal office’s division chiefs on emerging legal issues were critical to our success. In addition, our legal team relied heavily on the expertise and support of assigned reservists and reservists from the 151st Legal Operations Detachment for both planning and execution of the inauguration.
A Worldwide Pandemic: Reimagining an Inauguration
Although it informed every decision made to support the inauguration, COVID-19 did not impact the success of Inauguration Day due to careful planning and clear understanding of risks. For our legal team, COVID-19 posed the same challenges to communication, collaboration, and cooperation that others in DoD and broader workforces have experienced in the remote-work environment. The pandemic also heightened the challenge of executing DoD’s participation in the inauguration: early in the planning process, we knew that we needed to be ready to execute an inauguration of uniquely historical significance.
Due to the delayed start of the formal presidential transition,20 JTF–NCR did not know the scope of PIC and JCCIC requests for DoD inauguration support until early January 2021. Therefore, JTF–NCR planned for a full-scale inauguration—consistent with historical precedent—while at the same time recognizing that at least some scaling down might ultimately be required. When plans were finalized, the differences between 2017’s inauguration and 2021’s were profound due to COVID-19. The number of DoD personnel was reduced by thousands.21 The 2,200 military personnel that traditionally support a parade and street cordon on Pennsylvania Avenue were scaled back to just over 200 personnel in a street cordon only. The customary eight to twelve inaugural balls—which normally include support from fifty military members each—were reduced to a single virtual event with participation from approximately 100 military personnel. No opening ceremony occurred, which typically requires 100 to 400 military personnel, and the number of military personnel needed for all other events (e.g., events at the Capitol, presidential escort, departure ceremony) was significantly reduced. These dramatic changes to the inauguration plan required the JTF–NCR team, including those of us providing legal advice, to work quickly to meet the reimagined intent, sometimes processing support requests in a number of hours that, in previous years, would have been reviewed over the course of days or weeks.
The pandemic also prompted us to consider how to keep DoD inauguration personnel safe while not unnecessarily restricting personal freedoms. Our legal team worked in conjunction with a COVID-19 mitigation operational planning team that met almost daily for several weeks to help advise on COVID-19 related legal issues, including leave and travel policies, command authority to protect the force, and contingency plans for operational authority in the event COVID-19 impacted key JTF–NCR leaders in advance of Inauguration Day. The legal team also adapted our trainings for a remotely operating force, balancing the need to keep personnel safe while ensuring their understanding of mission-specific duties. And, when a suspected COVID-19 case was discovered in the Joint Operations Center just before Inauguration Day, our legal team had to quickly revise our staffing plan—a good reminder to plan for the contingencies of a staffing shortfall.
Legal Support: Integration from Planning Through Execution
Beyond COVID-19-related issues, our legal team faced uncommon questions in operational law, fiscal law, ethics, administrative law, and even military justice during our support to the inauguration. We also worked with JTF–NCR leaders and action officers on matters that were not necessarily legal issues but required practical advice on the way ahead—matters at the intersection of law, policy, and best practice. For instance, our legal team worked with the JTF–NCR Communications Directorate to develop a media strategy for DoD content and scripts for military participants supporting the virtual events on the night of Inauguration Day.22 These non-traditional legal experiences helped us integrate as members of a joint team and challenged us to think beyond our functional areas of practice.23
Our legal team regularly attended JTF–NCR meetings to engage in discussions as issues emerged, and we actively participated in the joint planning process, especially mission analysis and course of action development.24 In addition, we provided a unique perspective as DoD representatives to meetings held by an interagency legal subcommittee for the inauguration, which allowed us to collaborate with attorneys experienced in national special security events at federal agencies (including the Secret Service, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Justice, Department of the Interior, and Department of Homeland Security) and district government offices (including the D.C. Metropolitan Police and D.C. Attorney General’s Office). Participating virtually in almost all meetings allowed our legal team to conduct research in real time and provide proactive legal advice as issues emerged, but also challenged us to sift through the fog of faceless screens and voices.
Operational Law Advice: The Tooth not the Tail25
Operational matters made up the preponderance of legal issues our team encountered. This included support requests from the PIC and JCCIC, training on the standing rules for the use of force (SRUF), and planning for potential consequence management. An important aspect of our legal support involved ensuring all operations—whether ceremonial or otherwise—were consistent with Title 10 authorities, DoD regulations, and the Ceremonial Guidelines.
Support requests from the PIC and JCCIC—which covered everything from the U.S. Army Band Herald Trumpets musicians playing fanfare at the swearing-in ceremony, to the joint team providing presidential escort to the White House, to members of The Old Guard facilitating the wreath laying ceremony at Arlington National Cemetery—required legal review. Our legal team shaped the process by which review of support requests occurred, ensuring legal review happened after all other stakeholders to the request had provided input. This allowed our legal team to provide JTF–NCR leadership with the most comprehensive legal advice. We closely checked to make sure each of the approximately thirty support requests would not result in violations of law or DoD regulation, and ensured the requested support fell within the Ceremonial Guidelines.26
Our legal team also coordinated and provided tailored training on SRUF to Title 10 forces (e.g., medics, cordon personnel, and escorts) participating in the inauguration.27 While these rules—at least at a high level—were likely familiar to some, our legal team remained mindful that, for the past two decades, our military personnel have been primarily engaged in overseas operational environments where different rules apply. For many, the SRUF were likely new, and thus we needed to ensure that each inauguration participant received clear training on the SRUF that taught them not only the SRUF itself,28 but also helped them understand how the SRUF might apply in real-world situations specific to the inauguration. Creating hypothetical SRUF scenarios tailored to each of the various inauguration missions helped our legal team convey the nuances of the SRUF and, importantly, break through the virtual wall inherent to training that cannot be conducted in-person. This point is key for legal practitioners providing SRUF training in any context.
We also worked to ensure that our JTF–NCR command team had a clear understanding of their non-ceremonial authorities. Joint Task Force–National Capital Region provided an important role in support of the Secret Service for potential consequence management.29 This effort positioned specialized military capabilities and an array of response forces at the ready in the event of an emergency.30 Some of these capabilities and forces were prepositioned at the request of the Secret Service. Any additional requests for emerging needs would have required approval by proper authority—likely the Secretary of Defense.31 Given the importance of authorities in this context, the transfer of responsibility between administrations (to include DoD personnel) became relevant to our planning process.
The day prior to Inauguration Day, then-Deputy Secretary of Defense David L. Norquist produced a plan detailing the named successors for key DoD positions upon departure by senior non-career officials from the outgoing administration at 1201 on 20 January 2021.32 In the event an additional request for forces became necessary after President Joseph Biden took office, the succession memorandum would have directed us to the proper approval authority.
Our legal team also regularly advised on the scope of Title 10 authorities—an issue which increased in prominence after the deployment of over 25,000 National Guard members from all fifty states to the National Capital Region in response to the 6 January 2021 attack on the Capitol.33 Because the Posse Comitatus Act and DoD regulation limit the types of direct support active duty (i.e., Title 10) forces can provide to law enforcement,34 the Secret Service relied on the National Guard (under the authority of Title 32) to provide various types of security support.35 In fact, members of the National Guard were sworn in and deputized as special police for the U.S. Capitol Police, U.S. Park Police, and D.C. Metropolitan Police Department.36 Our legal team worked to educate Title 10 personnel on the limitations of their authority in support of law enforcement, and we participated in daily National Guard Bureau legal coordination meetings with our Title 32 counterparts to ensure situational awareness between our forces.
Fiscal and Administrative Law Advice: Authorizations, Exceptions, and Waivers37
As in any operational assignment, our legal team also conducted fiscal reviews and provided administrative law and ethics advice to JTF–NCR leadership. While many of these issues were not unlike those that judge advocates regularly encounter, the context of the inauguration (overlaid with the ongoing pandemic) created a new flavor to these seemingly pedestrian questions.38 We advised on a broad range of matters—from whether congressionally-appropriated funds could be used to purchase inauguration coins or unit patches, to whether DoD personnel could use non-federal property (e.g., Smithsonian buildings) for inauguration purposes. Below are a few key issues that involved inauguration-specific analysis.
Department of Defense personnel needed water to keep hydrated during Inauguration Day. As a general rule, bottled water cannot be purchased using appropriated funds absent a specific exception.39 To purchase bottled water with appropriated funds, an agency must show that either an agency’s work site has no available potable drinking water or that the available drinking water poses health risks if consumed.40 Thus, our legal team analyzed the availability of potable, safe water at locations where certain ceremonial forces performed their missions on Inauguration Day. This involved understanding whether bottles of water and/or backpacks could be taken through Secret Service and U.S. Capitol Police security checkpoints, whether water fountains were available and safe due to COVID-19, and whether carrying water sources would allow personnel in their service dress to project the professional image required by the ceremonial mission.
Gifts received by DoD inauguration participants also required a unique analysis in the context of the inauguration. For instance, our legal team analyzed whether military assistants could accept N95 masks as a gift from the PIC.41 We closely scrutinized the PIC’s status (prohibited or permissible source), the intent in providing the gift, and the value of the gift, to assess the hopefully once-in-a-lifetime question: whether face masks could legally be provided as a gift to individual military members. Our legal team also considered approval authorities for accepting the gifts, including whether the gifts should be accepted at the individual level, the JTF–NCR command level, or by a higher authority.
The use of military assistants during the inauguration events posed unique ethics questions. Military assistants were in the grade of O-4 and had been hand-selected and tasked with coordinating and facilitating the participation of significant inaugural participants (SIPs) (i.e., presidential cabinet members and personnel with cabinet-level rank) and designated inaugural participants (DIPs) (i.e., immediate family members of the President/Vice President and President-Elect/Vice President-Elect) at official inauguration events. Military assistants and drivers42 (noncommissioned officers selected to facilitate SIP and DIP transportation) interacted constantly with the DIPs and SIPs during inauguration events,43 which gave them a unique and intimate opportunity to speak with highly visible people—some of whom have a professional interest in government and politics. To ensure military assistants and drivers did not stray into questionable situations (e.g., contemptuous speech, political activities, and gifts), our legal team provided comprehensive training with scenarios based on the duties of military assistants and drivers. As with the SRUF training, the targeted scenarios in the ethics context also helped our legal team ensure that the military assistants and drivers could concretely envision how they might encounter (and avoid violating) ethics and other rules.
Conclusion
Mr. President, I’m pulling for your success. Your success is our
country’s success.44
As with any military operation, an unexpected amount of legal support occurred behind the scenes of the 59th Presidential Inauguration—a historic and unprecedented event. This afforded an opportunity for our legal team to rethink the way we have seen legal issues in the past and grow as leaders among a joint team. Judge advocates integrate among the joint staff to provide a unique capability to military operations.45 During the 59th Presidential Inauguration, our legal team drew from all functional areas of practice46 to enable our part in a safe and successful event honoring our new Commander in Chief. It was our privilege to serve among a well-integrated JTF–NCR team. Planning is already underway for the 60th Presidential Inauguration, which will—without a doubt—provide the next team of legal advisors with a once-in-a-lifetime experience. TAL
Lt Col Micah W. Elggren is the chief of operational law for Joint Task Force – National Capital Region and U.S. Army Military District of Washington at Fort McNair, Washington, D.C.
Maj Brian M. Shust is a team lead and trial attorney with the Air Force Commercial Litigation Field Support Center at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland.
CPT Ravi R. Doshi is an Army Reserve judge advocate in the 151st Legal Operations Detachment in Alexandria, Virginia.
Notes
1. Joseph R. Biden, Jr., U.S. President, Inaugural Address at the United States Capitol (Jan. 20, 2021).
2. The first inauguration held on the west front of the Capitol occurred on 20 January 1981 for former President Ronald W. Reagan. Inauguration at the U.S. Capitol, Architect of the Capitol, https://www.aoc.gov/what-we-do/programs-ceremonies/inauguration (last visited Jan. 11, 2021).
3. C. Todd Lopez, Despite COVID-19 Restrictions, Service Members Play Important Role in Inauguration, U.S. Dep’t of Def. (Jan. 19, 2021), https://www.defense.gov/Explore/News/Article/Article/2476394/despite-covid-19-restrictions-service-members-play-important-role-in-inaugurati/. This number does not include the over 20,000 National Guard personnel who provided security support during the inauguration.
4. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Joint Pub. 3-84, Legal Support, at II-6 to II-16 (2 Aug. 2016) [hereinafter
Joint Pub. 3-84]. As the operational law team for Joint Task Force–National Capital Region, we actively participated in the joint operation planning process—from mission analysis to execution—to ensure all aspects of the Department of Defense’s (DoD) participation in inauguration events complied with federal law, DoD regulations, and the standards of conduct for DoD employees.
5. Uniquely American, Joint Cong. Comm. on Inaugural Ceremonies, https://www.inaugural.senate.gov/uniquely-american/ (last visited Jan.
11, 2021).
6. U.S. Const. amend. XX, § 1; U.S. Const. art. II, § 1, cl. 8.
7. President Washington’s Inauguration, George Washington’s Mount Vernon, https://www.mountvernon.org/george-washington/the-first-president/inauguration/timeline
(last visited Jan. 11, 2021).
8. 10 U.S.C. § 2553(b) (1980).
9. Joint Force Headquarters–National Capital Region (JFHQ–NCR) transitions to Joint Task Force–National Capital Region (JTF–NCR) at the direction of U.S. Northern Command. The Secretary of Defense approved the establishment of JFHQ–NCR in 2003 to conduct planning and coordination for homeland defense and civil support missions. Who We Are: About, Joint Task Force–Nat’l Cap. Region & U.S. Army Mil. Dist. of
Wash., https://mdwhome.mdw.army.mil/about (last visited Jan. 17, 2022).
10. See U.S. Dep’t of Def., Joint Chiefs of Staff, Joint Pub. 3-33, Joint Task Force Headquarters, at I-8 to I-9 (31 Jan. 2018).
11. Memorandum from Deputy Sec’y of Def. to Chief Mgmt. Officer of the Dep’t of Def. et al., subject: Ceremonial Support to the 2021 Presidential Inauguration (8 Sept. 2020) [hereinafter Ceremonial Guidelines].
12. Records of Presidential Inaugural Committees, Nat’l Archives, https://www.archives.gov/research/guide-fed-records/groups/274.html
(last visited Jan. 18, 2022).
13. About the Committee, Joint Cong. Comm. on Inaugural Ceremonies, https://www.inaugural.senate.gov/about-the-committee/ (last visited
Jan. 11, 2021).
14. Major General Omar J. Jones, IV, Commanding General, JTF–NCR, organized inauguration support personnel into four task forces, which were then sub-organized into specific joint teams. With the exception of one task force designated for potential consequence management operations, the preponderance of personnel assigned or attached to JTF–NCR provided ceremonial support.
15. The Federal Emergency Management Agency defines consequence management as “measures to protect public health and safety, restore essential government services, and provide emergency relief to governments, businesses, and individuals affected by the consequences of terrorism.” Fed. Emergency Mgmt. Agency, Managing the Emergency Consequences of
Terrorist Incidents: Interim Planning Guide for State and Local
Governments, at J-1 (2002).
16. Lopez, supra note 3.
17. U.S. Dep’t of Def., Instr. 3025.20, Defense Support of Special Events 12 (6 Apr. 2012) (C1, 24 May 2017);
Shawn Reese, Cong. Rsch. Serv., R43522, National Special Security Events: Fact
Sheet
2 (Jan. 11, 2021). Occasions of national significance, such as a
presidential inauguration or major sporting event, may be designated as
a national special security event by the president or the president’s
representative. This designation allows the Secret Service to serve as
the lead federal agency for planning and coordinating security
operations. As the lead federal agency, the Secret Service coordinates
with federal, state, and local agencies that provide support to the
event—including DoD. Under a 2018 memorandum from then-Secretary of the
Department of Homeland Security Kirstjen M. Nielsen, certain recurring
events, including presidential inaugurations, are designated as national
special security events on an ongoing basis.
See Memorandum from Sec’y, U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec. to All Fed. Dep’ts & Agencies, subject: Designation of Recurring Significant Events as National Special Security Events (24 Sept. 2018).
18. Our legal team negotiated a memorandum of agreement with the National Archives and Records Administration general counsel and coordinated on reimbursement issues under the Economy Act. 31 U.S.C. § 1535 (1984). We ensured that the agreement protected DoD personnel; clearly defined the parameters of DoD responsibilities and support; and restricted support that might be against the law or DoD regulation.
19. Our legal team drafted the memorandum of agreement between DoD and the Presidential Inaugural Committee (PIC), which detailed the conditions under which JTF–NCR could provide support, the procedures to request support, and the types of support requiring reimbursement.
20. Matt Viser, After Long, Bitter Delay, Biden Transition Kicks into Gear, Wash. Post (Nov. 24, 2020), https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/biden-transition-trump/2020/11/24/26b8e4ba-2e7a-11eb-bae0-50bb17126614_story.html.
21. Lopez, supra note 3.
22. See Biden Inaugural Committee, Celebrating America Hosted by Tom Hanks–Biden-Harris Inauguration 2021, YouTube (Jan. 20, 2021), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkRLaS9P8r8 [hereinafter Celebrating America].
23. See Joint Pub. 3-84, supra note 4, at III-2 to III-4.
24. See generally
Joint Chiefs of Staff, Joint Pub. 5-0, Joint Planning, at III-12 to III-44 (1 Dec. 2020); Joint Pub. 3-84, supra note 4, at II-7 to II-13. Our regular meetings included the Joint Planning Group, Future Operations Steering Group, Future Operations Decision Board, Plans and Operations Steering Group, Plans and Operations Decisions Board, Inauguration Course of Action Development Operational Planning Team, and Joint Exercise Working Group.
25. Joint Pub. 3-84, supra note 4, at I-1. “It is also clear from the commanders who testified that legal advice is essential to effective combat operations in the current environment—legal advice is now part of the tooth not the tail.” Id. (quoting Section 574, 2005 National Defense Authorization Act, Independent Review Panel to Study the Relationship between Military Department General Counsels and Judge Advocates General, 15 Sept. 2005).
26. The Ceremonial Guidelines required each support request to satisfy certain criteria. Support needed to be an official inaugural event, i.e., sponsored by the PIC or the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies, and DoD personnel could not be placed in “demeaning assignments [where] they may discredit themselves or DoD” such as “bag handlers” or “parking lot attendants.” Ceremonial Guidelines, supra note 11, at 4. Support had to avoid the perception of “impropriety, implied endorsement, or selective benefit” to the requestor or other entity, and DoD could not be in a position to provide support that competed with commercial enterprises or that was available from another governmental agency. Any entity requesting DoD support that was normally available via commercial means needed to justify why DoD, and not commercial vendors, should provide the capability. Certain categories of support considered to be in the best interest of DoD did not require reimbursement. Ceremonial Guidelines, supra note 11, at 4–6.
27. See Joint Chiefs of Staff, Joint Pub. 3-28, Defense Support of Civil
Authorities, at C-1 (29 Oct. 2018) (discussing applicability of rule for the use of
force for DoD personnel).
28. Ctr. for L. & Mil. Operations (CLAMO), The Judge Advoc. Gen.’s
Legal Ctr. & Sch., Domestic Operational Law Handbook
ch. 10 (2021).
29. Lopez, supra note 3.
30. Id.
31. See Lawrence Kapp, Cong. Rsch. Serv., IF11324, Defense Primer: Defense
Support of Civil Authorities 1 (2020).
32. See Memorandum from Deputy Sec’y of Def. to Senior Pentagon Leadership and Def. Agency and DoD Field Activity Directors, subject: Succession Plan for January 20, 2021 (19 Jan. 2021).
33. See Press Release, U.S Dep’t of Def., Statement by Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller on National Guard Support in Washington, D.C. (Jan. 18, 2021), https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Releases/Release/Article/2474963/statement-by-acting-secretary-of-defense-christopher-miller-on-national-guard-s/; Terri Moon Cronk, 12
Guardsmen Relieved of Duty for Inauguration, Officials Say, U.S. Dep’t of Def. (Jan. 19, 2021), https://www.defense.gov/Explore/News/Article/Article/2476044/12-guardsmen-relieved-of-duty-for-inauguration-officials-say/.
34. 18 U.S.C. § 1385 (1878); U.S. Dep’t of Def., Directive No. 3025.21, Def. Support of Civ. Law Enforcement Agencies (27 Feb. 2013) (C1, 8 Feb. 2019).
35. Captain Tinashe Machona, D.C. National Guardsmen to Provide Traffic Control and Crowd
Management During D.C. Demonstrations, D.C. Nat’l Guard (Jan. 4, 2021), https://dc.ng.mil/Public-Affairs/News-Article-View/Article/2461793/dc-national-guardsmen-to-provide-traffic-control-and-crowd-management-during-dc/; Inaugural Heritage, D.C. Nat’l Guard, https://dc.ng.mil/About-Us/Heritage/DC-National-Guard-Museum/Exhibits/Inaugural-Heritage/ (last visited Jan. 12, 2022).
36. Machona, supra note 35; Staff Sergeant Anthony Small, Guard’s Judge Advocates Brief Soldiers and Airmen in DC, Nat’l Guard (Jan. 17, 2021), https://www.nationalguard.mil/News/Article/2474812/guards-judge-advocates-brief-soldiers-and-airmen-in-dc/.
37. See Joint Pub. 3-84, supra note 4, at II-9.
38. The Mission Installation Contracting Command at Fort Belvoir, Virginia, provided contracting support for JTF–NCR inauguration requirements.
39. Clarence Maddox—Relief of Liability for Improper Payments for Bottled Water, B-303920, 2006 U.S. Comp. Gen. LEXIS 54 (Comp. Gen. Mar. 21, 2006).
40. See id.; U.S. Agency for Int’l Dev.—Purchase of Bottled Drinking Water, B-247871, 1992 U.S. Comp. Gen LEXIS 1170 (Comp. Gen. Apr. 10, 1992); Dep’t of the Army, Aberdeen Proving Ground—Use of Appropriated Funds for Bottled Water, B-324781 (Comp. Gen. Dec. 17, 2013); Dep’t of the Army—Use of Appropriations for Bottled Water, B-310502, 2008 U.S. Comp. Gen. LEXIS 38 (Comp. Gen. Feb. 4, 2008).
41. 5 C.F.R. § 2635.202 (2021) (discussing general prohibition on acceptance of gifts); 5 C.F.R. § 2635.204 (2021) (discussing exception to prohibition on acceptance of unsolicited gifts).
42. Our legal team strategized with the military assistants team on use and access to PIC-procured vehicles, requiring us to consider whether the vehicles should be treated as government vehicles.
43. We also worked with public health to create procedures for transporting and interacting with significant inaugural participants and designated inaugural participants to ensure adequate physical distancing while also meeting the intent of the Ceremonial Guidelines.
44. Celebrating America, supra note 22, at 1:18:55 (former U.S. President George W. Bush speaking to President Joseph Biden in a videotaped joint message with former U.S. Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama).
45. Joint Pub. 3-84, supra note 4, at x.
46. Id. at III-3 to III-4.