Otter Globe and Intelligencer: On December 17th stories started circulating that Michael Flynn, the felon who was convicted for lying to the FBI, had suggested that Trump could declare Martial Law and order a “redo” of the 2020 Presidential Election. Subsequent reporting indicated that Trump was sympathetic to this idea, and had suggested following up on Flynn’s suggestion in a fiery White House meeting. Flynn and Trump are both wrong. Although the Constitution does establish that the President has the authority to declare Martial Law, subsequent Supreme Court rulings have established that it is an act of last resort, and that the President may not declare Martial Law in an arbitrary and capricious manner. Allowing the President to declare Martial Law at will would constitute a gross violation of the Balance of Powers clause. Additionally, allowing the President to declare Martial Law, then orchestrate a do-over of a Federal Election would violate precepts of Common Law, as well as existing Federal Election laws and State election codes. Because the declaration of Martial Law would be un-Constitutional, and therefore could not be considered an official Act of the President, Trump would be liable for violating Federal Law, and his actions could become grounds for pursuing criminal charges against him once he is out of office.