Police encounter many non-citizens, who still have many fundamental rights. Any given person might be a citizen, a green card holder, a temporary visa holder, an undocumented person, or a tourist who is not subject to visa requirements. I don't recall the percentage offhand but something like 10% of US residents are not citizens.

The point was the militarization of the police, that they are adopting militarized language when dealing with the general public. I used citizen with a lowercase 'c' here, as in "private citizen" and not as in legal citizenship status to a sovereign nation.

Thing is the 'civilian' distinction goes back decades and some definitions extend the nen-civilian status to firefighters as well as police. It's neither new nor uniquely American, though I'm sure exactly when it expanded beyond the purely military use fo the term.

It’s almost as if they’re saying the policy doesn’t apply to interviews with fellow law enforcement officers...

The way we (Americans) have allowed the line between “police” and “military” to blur is certainly concerning and it seems like this is just another example.

I'd love to see the line blur a bit more. Specifically, by making police officers be investigated by military police, and to be judged by military tribunals.