We don't have enough information to determine the exact number of national emergency declarations in the U.S. that have included approval to activate the guard and reserve forces. However, we can provide some context on national emergency declarations and the activation of guard/reserve forces:

- The President of the United States has the authority under the National Emergencies Act to declare national emergencies. This grants them access to certain special powers depending on the circumstances.

- Activation of the National Guard and reserve forces requires separate and specific authorization, even during a declared national emergency. It is not automatically approved with every national emergency.

- Since the National Emergencies Act was established in 1976, there have been around 60 declared national emergencies of varying natures. Only some of these involved the military.

- Recent examples where guard/reserve activation was approved during a national emergency include:

  - 2001 following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. 

  - 2005 after Hurricane Katrina.

  - 2020 for the COVID-19 pandemic.

- The specifics and extent of guard/reserve activation depends on the details of each emergency situation. The President and Department of Defense determine the details.

Here are some of the most recent national emergency declarations that involved the activation of National Guard/reserve forces under the previous two US presidential administrations:

Bush Administration:

2001 - September 11, 2001 (9/11). President George W. Bush declared a national emergency in response to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.  

2005 - Hurricane Katrina. President George W. Bush declared a national emergency in response to Hurricane Katrina, which devastated the Gulf Coast in August 2005. 

Obama Administration:

- 2009 - H1N1 flu pandemic. Activated National Guard personnel in certain states to assist with response efforts. Executive Orders: Orders were issued to authorize the Secretary of Defense to provide support, including the activation of National Guard and Reserve units to assist in medical response and logistical support. 

- 2011 - Libya crisis. Activated reserve forces to assist with military operations.

- 2014 - Ukraine crisis. Activated National Guard and reserves to participate in military exercises with European allies. 

Trump Administration: 

- 2018 - Border security and immigration. Activated National Guard troops to support border patrol agencies.

- 2020 - COVID-19 pandemic. Activated National Guard units for various response efforts nationwide.

- 2021 - Presidential inauguration. Activated over 20,000 National Guard troops to provide security in Washington D.C.

In summary, there is no definitive count available due to the complex nature of emergency declarations and military activations. But the President has the authority to activate the guard and reserves in response to national emergencies when deemed necessary. The extent and details vary. So in the Obama era, National Guard/reserves were activated for public health crises and overseas military operations. During the Trump presidency, they were mostly for domestic security concerns like immigration and public safety for major events.

Executive Order 13848, issued by President Donald J. Trump on September 12, 2018, aims to address the potential threat of foreign interference in United States elections. It states that while there's no evidence of foreign powers altering election outcomes, there is a growing risk due to digital technology. Here's a simplified summary:

• The order gives the Director of National Intelligence 45 days after a U.S. election to assess any foreign interference in the election, including its nature and methods, and to identify the foreign governments involved.

• The Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security have 45 days to evaluate if foreign interference affected the election's security, vote counting, or timely result reporting.

• Relevant agencies must share information with the Director of National Intelligence, and they can provide analysis or information on foreign interference at any time.

• If foreign interference is identified in a state, tribal, or local election, it will be included in the assessment.

• The Secretaries of State, Treasury, Attorney General, Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence must develop a framework to carry out their responsibilities in a way that maintains consistency, protects sensitive information, and respects free speech.

• The order allows for blocking the property and assets of foreign individuals or entities involved in election interference and imposing sanctions on them.

• It restricts donations or contributions to such blocked individuals or entities and limits their entry into the U.S.

• Transactions that evade or violate these prohibitions are also banned.

• The order defines various terms, like "foreign interference" (covert or deceptive actions by foreign governments or their agents to influence elections) and "foreign government."

• It authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with other officials, to issue rules and regulations to implement the order.

• The Secretary of the Treasury can submit reports to Congress about the national emergency declared in the order.

Has EO 13848 been extended?

Yes, Executive Order 13848 has been extended multiple times since its initial enactment in September 2018:

- In September 2019, President Trump issued a notice extending the national emergency declared in the order for an additional year, through September 2020.

- In September 2020, Trump again extended the national emergency through September 2021.

- In February 2021, after President Biden took office, the White House issued a notice extending the national emergency through September 2022.

- In August 2022 President Biden extended the order's national emergency and authorities through September 2023.

- On September 7, 2023, President Biden extended the EO for 1 year "with respect to the threat of foreign interference in or undermining public confidence in United States elections." 

So Executive Order 13848 remains in effect as an active presidential authority, with its provisions and powers continuously extended by both the Trump and Biden administrations.

The extensions highlight that successive administrations have seen ongoing threats to U.S. election security from foreign interference and wish to have the options provided by the executive.

The response from the Director of National Intelligence <-- URL to Article

Today I submitted the Intelligence Community’s report on foreign interference in the 2018 midterm elections to the President and appropriate executive departments and agencies, as directed by Section 1(a) of the Executive Order 13848, Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election. At this time, the Intelligence Community does not have intelligence reporting that indicates any compromise of our nation’s election infrastructure that would have prevented voting, changed vote counts, or disrupted the ability to tally votes. The activity we did see was consistent with what we shared in the weeks leading up to the election. Russia, and other foreign countries, including China and Iran, conducted influence activities and messaging campaigns targeted at the United States to promote their strategic interests. We did not make an assessment of the impact that these activities had on the outcome of the 2018 election. The US Intelligence Community is charged with monitoring and assessing the intentions, capabilities, and actions of foreign actors; it does not analyze US political processes or US public opinion. Preserving the integrity of our election systems and, more broadly, our democracy, is a top priority for the Intelligence Community. We will continue to work this critical topic as we begin preparing for the 2020 elections across all relevant elements of the federal government and with our state and local election partners. Daniel R. Coats, Director of National Intelligence.

The definitions of Foreign Government and Foreign Interference

Foreign Interference:

Foreign interference refers to covert or deceptive actions carried out by foreign governments or their agents with the intent to influence the political processes, policies, or outcomes of another country. In the context of Executive Order 13848 and similar regulations, foreign interference often specifically pertains to attempts to manipulate or disrupt elections, either through direct manipulation of voting systems, dissemination of misleading information, or other means that could impact the democratic processes of the targeted nation.

Foreign Government:

A foreign government is the governing body or political authority of a nation other than one's own. It represents the official authority of a sovereign state and exercises control over its territory, people, and affairs. In the context of regulations and orders related to national security, foreign governments are often distinguished from domestic entities, and measures are put in place to monitor and respond to actions undertaken by these foreign entities that may pose a threat or interfere with the internal affairs of another country.

The issue of foreign interference in U.S. elections, as addressed by Executive Order 13848 and related discussions, has highlighted several countries that are often of interest due to their perceived capabilities and historical instances of involvement in such activities. It's important to note that the list of countries may evolve based on geopolitical dynamics and emerging threats. 

• Russia: Russia has been a major focus due to its alleged interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential elections. The Intelligence Community has consistently identified Russia as a source of influence activities.

• China: China has been accused of engaging in various forms of influence campaigns and espionage activities. While not as extensively covered as Russia, concerns about China's potential interference have risen.

• Iran: Iran has been associated with cyber activities and disinformation campaigns targeting the United States. It is often mentioned alongside Russia and China in discussions about foreign interference.

These countries are not the only ones involved or potentially involved in such activities, and the landscape may change over time. Other nations with advanced cyber capabilities and geopolitical interests may also draw attention in discussions about foreign interference in U.S. elections. 

Sources:

EO 13848: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/09/14/2018-20203/imposing-certain-sanctions-in-the-event-of-foreign-interference-in-a-united-states-election 

September Extension: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/09/11/2023-19743/continuation-of-the-national-emergency-with-respect-to-foreign-interference-in-or-undermining-public 

Executive Order 13959 On November 12, 2020, then-President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 13959, aiming to counter the threat posed by securities investments funding Communist Chinese military companies (CCMCs). This order barred U.S. individuals from engaging in transactions with securities tied to identified CCMCs, part of broader efforts to address national security concerns related to China.

In response to this initial executive order, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) detailed specific provisions. The prohibitions in E.O. 13959 applied to subsidiaries of Chinese Military-Industrial Complex Companies (CMICs) only if publicly listed on the NS-CMIC List. Amendments and clarifications were made through subsequent actions.

On January 13, 2021, President Trump signed Executive Order 13974, amending Executive Order 13959. Later, on June 3, 2021, President Joe Biden superseded E.O. 13959 with a revised version, addressing the threat from securities investments financing certain companies of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). This revision expanded the scope to include concerns about the PRC's military-industrial complex involvement in military, intelligence, security research and development programs, and weapons production under the Military-Civil Fusion strategy.

Here is the entire excerpt by the Whitehouse on the revisions: Executive Order on Addressing the Threat from Securities Investments that Finance Certain Companies of the People’s Republic of China

Further, on June 3, 2021, President Biden signed Executive Order 14032, expanding the national emergency declared in E.O. 13959. This expansion was deemed necessary due to ongoing concerns related to securities investments financing certain companies in the PRC. According to section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act, this national emergency, as expanded by E.O. 14032, continued beyond November 12, 2023.

"For this reason, the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13959 of November 12, 2020, expanded in scope by Executive Order 14032 of June 3, 2021, must continue in effect beyond November 12, 2023. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13959 with respect to the threat from securities investments that finance certain companies of the PRC and expanded in Executive Order 14032." 

To understand the National Emergencies Act's termination provisions, it's crucial to note that a national emergency automatically terminates on its anniversary if the President does not publish a notice in the Federal Register within the ninety-day period prior to each anniversary date, explicitly stating its continuation. (Source 2: 50 U.S.C. § 1622)

For more details, refer to official sources:

• Executive Order 13959: Federal Register :: Addressing the Threat From Securities Investments That Finance Communist Chinese Military Companies 

• Executive Order 13974

• OFAC: | Office of Foreign Assets Control (treasury.gov) 

• White House Statement on Revisions: Executive Order on Addressing the Threat from Securities Investments that Finance Certain Companies of the People's Republic of China | The White House 

• Extending the National Emergency from E.O. 13959: Federal Register :: Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to the Threat From Securities Investments That Finance Certain Companies of the People's Republic of China 

• Executive Order 14032: Federal Register

Additional sources:

- Source 1: A Letter on the Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to Securing the Information and Communications Technology and Services Supply Chain | The White House

- Source 2: Description of the law on how National Emergencies are terminated: 50 U.S. Code § 1622 - National emergencies | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu)

And in case you wondering what the National Emergencies Act states, here is a quick summary:

Automatic termination of a national emergency

Section 202 (d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622 (d)) provides for the automatic termination of a national emergency12. The national emergency will terminate on the anniversary of the declaration of that emergency if, within the ninety-day period prior to each anniversary date, the President does not publish in the Federal Register and transmit to the Congress a notice stating that such emergency is to continue in effect after such anniversary2.

Executive Order 13958: Establishing the President's Advisory 1776 Commission

EO 13958 was written and introduced on November 2, 2020, and it was revoked on January 20, 2021, by EO 13985. Below is a brief description highlighting the key points of EO 13958. In one of the upfront paragraphs of this EO, it states: "The 1776 Commission's duties are to advise the President regarding how to better enable a rising generation to understand the history and principles of the founding of the United States in 1776 and to strive to form a more perfect Union..."

Key Points:

Section 1: Purpose

- The order aims to help the rising generation understand the history and principles of the United States' founding in 1776 to form a more perfect Union.

- Recognizes the American founding's vision of a political order in harmony with the Laws of Nature and Nature's God.

- Addresses recent attacks on the founding, highlighting issues related to race and the need for a balanced perspective on American history.

- Emphasizes the importance of accurate, honest, unifying, inspiring, and ennobling education grounded in the principles of the founding at the local level.

Section 2: The President's Advisory 1776 Commission

- Establishes the President's Advisory 1776 Commission within the Department of Education.

- The Commission, consisting of up to 20 members appointed by the President, is tasked with producing a report on the core principles of the American founding within a year.

- Aims to advise on plans for celebrating the 250th anniversary of American Independence, develop a "Presidential 1776 Award," and promote patriotic education.

- The Department of Education will provide funding and administrative support for the Commission.

- The Commission is set to terminate two years from the date of the order, unless extended by the President.

Section 3: Celebration of Constitution Day

- Directs relevant agencies to monitor compliance with the law requiring educational institutions receiving federal funds to hold a program on the United States Constitution on September 17 of each year.

Section 4: Prioritize the American Founding in Available Federal Resources

- Specifies that certain agencies, including the Department of Education, Department of Defense, and Department of State, shall prioritize federal resources to promote patriotic education, in line with applicable law.

Section 5: General Provisions

- Clarifies that the order does not impair existing legal authorities or functions of relevant departments.

- Specifies that implementation should be consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

- States that the order does not create any substantive or procedural rights enforceable against the United States or its entities.

Issued on November 2, 2020, by the White House.

Below are the Key Points for EO 13985 and how it impacts EO 13958:

Executive Order 13985 - Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government

Key Points:

1. Establishes a comprehensive approach to advancing equity for historically underserved communities and individuals.

2. Directs executive departments and agencies to recognize and address inequities in their policies and programs.

3. Emphasizes the role of the Domestic Policy Council in coordinating efforts to embed equity principles across the Federal Government.

4. Instructs the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to study methods for assessing equity and recommends approaches to expand their use.

5. Mandates agency heads to conduct equity assessments within 200 days to identify systemic barriers in their programs and policies.

6. Calls for the allocation of federal resources to address historical failures in investing in underserved communities.

7. Requires agencies to consult with underserved communities and civil rights organizations in developing plans to address barriers to participation in programs and procurement opportunities.

8. Establishes an Interagency Working Group on Equitable Data to improve data collection programs and infrastructure across agencies.

Impact on Executive Order 13958 (Establishing the President's Advisory 1776 Commission):

- Revocation: Executive Order 13958 is revoked.

- Review of Agency Actions: Agencies covered by Executive Order 13958 must review and identify proposed and existing agency actions related to or arising from it. Agencies should consider suspending, revising, or rescinding any such actions within 60 days.

- Revocation of the President's Advisory 1776 Commission: Executive Order 13958, which established the President's Advisory 1776 Commission, is revoked.

- General Provisions: The new order includes general provisions, emphasizing that it does not impair existing authorities or functions, should be implemented consistent with applicable law, and is not intended to create substantive or procedural rights enforceable against the United States.

Issued on January 20, 2021, by the White House.

Sources:

Executive Order 13958 - Federal Register :: Establishing the President's Advisory 1776 Commission 

Executive Order 13985 - Federal Register :: Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government 

Executive Order 13919, issued by President Donald J. Trump on April 30, 2020, is centered on enhancing counternarcotic operations in the Western Hemisphere, specifically under the jurisdiction of the United States Southern Command (SOUTHCOM). The order authorizes the activation of up to 200 members of the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) and the Selected Reserve for a maximum of 365 consecutive days.

• Specific Mission: The order is designed to support the "Enhanced Department of Defense Counternarcotic Operation in the Western Hemisphere." It underscores the importance of addressing drug trafficking in the region.

• Scope of Activation: IRR personnel activated under this order are dedicated exclusively to combating drug traffickers in the Western Hemisphere. Their use for purposes unrelated to counternarcotic operations is explicitly prohibited.

• Legal Constraints: Any utilization of the activated IRR personnel for activities beyond the counternarcotic mission would be inconsistent with their activation under Title 10 of the United States Code.

• Limitation of Rights: The order clarifies that it does not create new legal rights or benefits enforceable in legal or equitable proceedings.

As stated, Executive Order 13919 authorizes the activation of reserve military personnel for the sole purpose of supporting counternarcotic efforts in the Western Hemisphere under SOUTHCOM's jurisdiction, with a specific prohibition on using them for other purposes, such as Middle East deployments, which would be inconsistent with their activation under Title 10.

Key points:

• Activation Authority: The Secretary of Defense is instructed to activate units and individual members of the Selected Reserve, not exceeding 200 members at a time, for a maximum period of 365 consecutive days.

• Named Operational Mission: The activation is in response to a specific operational mission, which, in this case, is the counternarcotic operation in the Western Hemisphere.

• General Provisions: The order emphasizes that it does not affect the authority granted to executive departments or agencies by law. It also highlights that the implementation should be consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

• Legal Limitations: The order clarifies that it does not create any enforceable rights or benefits at law or in equity for any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, officers, employees, or any other person.

In practical terms, this Executive Order authorizes the mobilization of a specific number of Selected Reservists to support the counternarcotic operation in the Western Hemisphere. The order ensures that the activation is in accordance with legal provisions and is subject to budgetary considerations. It reflects the President's determination that the augmentation of the regular Armed Forces is necessary for the successful execution of the specified mission.

While it may seem this EO is directly involved with a covert operation and President Trump is still the commander in chief, sources have written a Fact Check based on these claims. Now, we all know the stigma behind fact-checking, but we wouldn't be critical thinkers if we didn't provide sources related to these topics for the readers to use and discern from themselves. However you find this information, that is for you to decide. Here, we provide the information and encourage readers to discern for themselves and ask questions.

This is the first paragraph and a quick capture of the article written by the Fact Checkers, who contacted the NGB and received responses related to these claims.  The link is provided below, for more information. 

"Did President Trump extend his power as president by law on January 6, 2021, and is the National Guard activated to Federal Duty and in complete control? No, that's not true: There is no constitutional authority under which a president can extend his legal authority past the end of his term. Joe Biden was sworn in as the 46th president of the United States on January 20, 2021, and as established in Article II Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution "The President shall be the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States"."

Lead Stories reached out by email to the National Guard to ask about these claims. We received a response by email on September 2, 2022. The National Guard spokesman replied:

"All orders for National Guard members ended May 23, 2021, for any missions relating to the Capitol riots occurring on January 6th, 2021. Also, the National Guard and other military services within the Department of Defense have many aircraft flying daily from state-to-state and/or inter-intra country in support of our mission, allies, and international partners."

Sources:

Executive Order 13919 - Federal Register :: Ordering the Selected Reserve of the Armed Forces to Active Duty 

Fact Checked: Fact Check: Flight Radar App Does NOT Show Trump Is Still In Power And A Covert Military Operation Is Underway | Lead Stories 

Executive Order 13963 issued by President Donald J. Trump on December 10, 2020, establishes an order of succession within the Department of Defense in case the Secretary of Defense is unable to perform their duties, resigns, or passes away. Here's a simplified summary:

• Order of Succession: The order outlines the officials within the Department of Defense who will assume the role of the Secretary of Defense if the Secretary is unable to perform their duties. The designated officials are listed in order, from the Deputy Secretary of Defense down to Assistant Secretaries of the Military Departments.

• Precedence: If multiple officials are designated within the same category, the order in which they were appointed to their respective offices determines their precedence. If their appointment dates are the same, their precedence is determined by the order in which they took the oath of office.

• Exceptions: Acting officials in these roles and individuals not eligible to serve under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act are excluded from acting as Secretary.

• Presidential Discretion: The President has the discretion to depart from this order when designating an Acting Secretary, as long as it is consistent with the law.

• Revocation: The order revokes a previous Executive Order (13533) related to the order of succession within the Department of Defense.

• No Legal Rights Created: The order emphasizes that it doesn't create any legal rights or benefits enforceable by any party against the U.S. government, its departments, officials, or any other entity.

In essence, this executive order establishes a clear hierarchy of officials who will temporarily assume the role of the Secretary of Defense in the event the Secretary is unable to perform their duties. It also provides guidelines for determining their order of precedence and underscores the President's discretion in making these appointments.

For this Executive Order in Particular, let's take a look at the current message being shared. It's often confused with screenshots of Aircraft flying to and from Florida and Guantanamo Bay this may be evidence of transporting political figures to face military tribunals. In fact, there were claims an invitation was extended and they were going to be viewed in person. However, the requests to access the tribunals were rejected multiple times. There are screenshots of letters and a YouTube video which speaks directly to this. 

Derek Johnson's attempts to attend Tribunals and the Rejection

Linda Forsythe from C-vine News has Derek's refusal letters from Ron Flesivg and then has her letter to Derek where she invited him to ft meade to view tribunals via CCTV. https://youtu.be/RaH4ShYOgVM?si=BadNihG8snIlR5Ud

Executive Order 13823, Executive Order 13823, signed by President Donald J. Trump on January 30, 2018, focuses on the lawful detention of terrorists at the U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay. The order revokes the section of a previous executive order (Executive Order 13492) that called for the closure of detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay. It emphasizes the legality, safety, and humanity of detention operations at Guantanamo Bay, stating that these operations are conducted in accordance with U.S. and international law.

The order acknowledges the ongoing armed conflict with entities such as al-Qa'ida, the Taliban, and associated forces, asserting the need for continued detention to protect against significant threats to the security of the United States. It specifically addresses concerns about individuals with difficult and dangerous profiles, expressing worry about their potential reengagement in hostilities if given the opportunity.

Key provisions include the continuation of detention operations at Guantanamo Bay, the possibility of transporting additional detainees to the facility when lawful and necessary, and a directive for the Secretary of Defense to recommend policies on the disposition of individuals captured in armed conflicts. Detainees transferred after the order's date are subject to periodic reviews to determine the necessity of continued law of war detention.

Rules of construction clarify the order's limitations, allowing for the transfer of individuals away from Guantanamo Bay when appropriate and maintaining existing laws related to the detention of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents. The order also grants the Attorney General the authority to investigate, detain, and prosecute terrorists subject to U.S. criminal laws and jurisdiction.

The general provisions underscore that the order does not impair the authority of executive departments or agencies, nor does it affect the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. It is to be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations. Additionally, the order explicitly states that it does not create any substantive or procedural rights or benefits enforceable against the United States or its entities.

The order was filed with the Office of the Federal Register on February 1, 2018, and published in the Federal Register on February 2, 2018. The DCPD Number associated with this executive order is DCPD201800063.

To truly show the full context surrounding the conflict of shutting down the facility, we need to look at the historical framework by administration:

Chronological Summary of Guantanamo Detention Policies by Presidential Administration:

1. George W. Bush Administration (2002-2008):

   - Opened Guantanamo Bay detention center.

   - Bush administration worked to close it due to concerns about being a propaganda tool.

2. Barack Obama Administration (2009-2017):

   - Continued the policy of pursuing Guantanamo closure.

   - Signed an Executive Order 13492 on January 22, 2009, aiming to close Guantanamo within a year.

   - Transferred over 500 detainees to facilitate closure.

   - Forty-one detainees remained at Guantanamo by the end of the Obama administration.

   - Introduced Periodic Review Board (PRB) process for reviewing detainees' cases.

3. Donald Trump Administration (2017-2021):

   - No transfers of detainees to or from Guantanamo during Trump's term.

   - President Trump signed Executive Order (EO) 13823 just before his first State of the Union address.

   - Reversed the policy of closing Guantanamo, keeping it open and allowing for the transfer of additional detainees.

   - Required the Secretary of Defense, within 90 days, to submit detention policy recommendations to the president.

   - Maintained the PRB process for reviewing detainees' cases.

   - Did not reverse Obama's EO on torture, suspend transfers from Guantanamo, or revisit the CIA detention and interrogation program.

**Note:** The order of bullet points represents the chronological order of events related to Guantanamo detention policies across different administrations.

4. Post-Trump Era (2021 onward):

 Summary of Post-Trump Era Efforts Regarding Guantanamo:

The current administration, led by President Biden, has displayed a gradual reduction in detainees at Guantanamo, signaling a departure from the previous administration's stance. Despite this progress, closing the facility remains a lengthy process.

Biden's approach to Guantanamo has been notably low-profile, differing from the more vocal strategy of the Obama era. Speculation surrounds whether this quiet stance is a tactical move to minimize political backlash. Analysts suggest that Biden, having learned from Obama's experiences, is cautiously implementing measures to release detainees, aligning with policies from the Obama era.

In February, a review board approved the safe release of more than half of the detainees, although specific release processes have not been disclosed. Anticipated pushback against closing Guantanamo stems from arguments asserting its role in obtaining crucial information during the ongoing armed conflict. Cully Stimson defended Guantanamo, citing legal entitlement to detain enemy forces during hostilities.

Questions arise about the extent to which Biden is implementing Obama's policies. Obama's initial executive orders outlined a timeline for detainee trials or releases, aiming for a faster process than the Bush Administration. Biden's administration echoes a commitment to a thorough and deliberate process, focusing on responsibly reducing the detainee population while prioritizing national security.

The future of Guantanamo under Biden remains uncertain. The administration emphasizes a dedicated and careful approach to reducing the detainee population while safeguarding national security. The construction of a second courtroom suggests efforts to accelerate detainee processing through military commissions. Ned Price, the State Department spokesperson, reinforces the administration's commitment to a responsible and secure approach in shaping the future of Guantanamo.

The Periodic Review Board and the Current Status of Guantanamo Bay

As of April 20, 2023, detainees that remain at Guantanamo Bay are undergoing the processes outlined below:

The Periodic Review Board (PRB) is a process established to regularly review the cases of detainees held at Guantanamo Bay. It determines whether continued detention is necessary for national security or if detainees can be transferred elsewhere under certain security measures.

1. Periodic Review Board (PRB): 

   - A system to check if it's still necessary to keep certain individuals in Guantanamo Bay.

2. Review Process:

   - Regular checks are done to see if a detainee poses a threat. 

   - If not, they might be sent back to their home country with specific security measures.

3. Recent Example:

   - Said bin Brahim bin Umran Bakush (ISN 685) was released to Algeria after a PRB decided he no longer posed a significant threat.

   - Security measures like monitoring and travel restrictions were put in place.

4. Overall Goal:

   - The U.S. aims to responsibly reduce the number of detainees in Guantanamo Bay and eventually close the facility.

5. PRB Panel:

   - The board consists of officials from the Department of Defense, Homeland Security, Justice, State, Joint Staff, and the Director of National Intelligence.

6. Current Status:

   - There are 30 detainees at Guantanamo Bay.

   - 16 are eligible for transfer.

   - 3 are eligible for a Periodic Review Board.

   - 9 are involved in the military commissions process.

   - 2 detainees have been convicted in military commissions.

If you have taken an interest in the Human Rights aspects of the use for Guantanamo Bay, you can follow this group:

Summary of the Organization's Efforts:

The organization, spearheaded by dedicated individuals and legal professionals, is fervently campaigning to close the Guantanamo Bay detention center. Their mission, endorsed by notable figures such as legal experts, military officials, and human rights advocates, emphasizes the detrimental impact of Guantanamo on America's values and national security. Despite limited progress, with only ten releases during President Joe Biden's term, they continue to press for immediate closure, highlighting the prison's negative influence on the nation and its role as a symbol for terrorist recruitment.

The organization urges President Biden to fulfill the closure efforts initiated by President Obama and calls on Congress to cease politicizing Guantanamo's fate. Emphasizing the moral stain that the prison represents, they underscore its undermining of the rule of law, posing a challenge to a fundamental principle cherished by all Americans. The individuals and organizations involved are resolute in their call to make 2023 the year for closing Guantanamo.

How to Reach the Organization:

For further information and inquiries, interested parties can contact Andy Worthington, the co-founder of the campaign along with Tom Wilner. Mr. Worthington, a journalist and author, serves as a key point of contact for those seeking more details or wishing to contribute to the cause. He can be reached via email at info@closeguantanamo.org.

Sources:

Executive Order 13823 - Executive Order 13823—Protecting America Through Lawful Detention of Terrorists | The American Presidency Project (ucsb.edu) 

Gov Info - govinfo.gov/content/pkg/DCPD-201800063/html/DCPD-201800063.htm 

Human Rights First - The Trump Administration's Executive Order on Guantanamo - Human Rights First 

Press Release - Guantanamo Bay Detainee Transfer Announced > U.S. Department of Defense > Release 

Query on Press Releases - Guantanamo Bay - U.S. Department of Defense Search Results (usa.gov) 

Human Rights Organization (Close Guantanamo) - Welcome to "Close Guantánamo" (closeguantanamo.org) 

Alliance for Citizen Engagement - What Is The United States Doing In Guantanamo Bay—20 Years Later? | ACE (ace-usa.org) 

Click here to see the fact checks on Derek's assessment of the National Guard and its History