When a city is under martial law, doesn't that mean that the military chain of command sets aside civilian law, hence a general could only be placed under arrest, if his superior (the President) ordered it?
shareWhen a city is under martial law, doesn't that mean that the military chain of command sets aside civilian law, hence a general could only be placed under arrest, if his superior (the President) ordered it?
Wrong in part. The President *is* the highest military commander (Commander-in-Chief) and therefore retains authority over the military under Martial Law. It doesn't somehow transfer to the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
shareWell your point is really gripping and i was thinking about it too. Apparently @the_la_baker has made the answer more complex and confusing rather than answering it.
I apologize that i don't know about the martial law rules but to my knowledge, when there is military rule on Full scale, then there is no one else than Superior Army Chief and he is all in all.
Provided in this film, it was said that the city of Brooklyn is under martial law and i SUPPOSE it was partial because even during that time FBI was working and they were allowed in many places to pass through the tress-passes. So it was not a full scale martial law.
Now comes the question was Hub eligible to make that arrest of an army chief when FBI comes under him in that condition. But remember that he talked the words saying that he was using unnecessary means or even brutal acts to bring the situation under control. That's why he arrested him. The only confusing point here is - does law permits an FBI agent to arrest army chief?
Well your point is really gripping and i was thinking about it too. Apparently @the_la_baker has made the answer more complex and confusing rather than answering it.