It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pres. Lincoln's Marshall Law Constitutional

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 10:05 PM
link   
Hello,

I am sooo sorry and I appoligize if i posted this in the wrong part of the forum but I dindt know the best place. My question is, was Lincolns ruling of Marshall Law on Maryland COnstitutional (during civil war). Has there been a Supreme Court ruling since on this isssue? Any info on this topic would be appreciated.

Thank You

If i posted this in the wrong sopt, please let me know the correct spot. Sorry for any disturbance. Thank You




posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 10:28 PM
link   
Don't you mean 'Martial Law', or is my ignorance showing?

I know that the SCOTUS found his suspension of habeas corpusp to be unconstitutional.

For that matter they also found the Sedition Act unconstitutional no? But that was long before Lincoln.



posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 10:59 PM
link   
The question as to whether Lincoln was constitutionally authorized has never been answered definitively since FDR basically did it again with respect to the Japanese concentration camps. IMO both Lincoln and Roosevelt were wrong.

This is from a great opinion piece I found on the subject written by SCOTUS Chief Justice Rehnquist:



The provision of the Constitution dealing with habeas corpus is found in Article I, dealing with the legislative power vested in Congress, and provides that the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended unless in time of war or rebellion the public safety shall require it. The question of whether only Congress may suspend it has never been authoritatively answered to this day, but the Lincoln Administration proceeded to arrest and detain persons suspected of disloyal activities.


The article states that Chief Justice Roger Taney attempted to order Lincoln to show just cause for suspending the writ of habeas corpus but was basically ignored. Taney went on to issue a court opinion the stated that only the Congress had authority to suspend the writ of habeas corpus not the President. This also went ignored by Lincoln.

Full article can be found - here

You've definitely given me something to do some research on - thnx.
B.



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 02:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bleys
The article states that Chief Justice Roger Taney attempted to order Lincoln to show just cause for suspending the writ of habeas corpus but was basically ignored. Taney went on to issue a court opinion the stated that only the Congress had authority to suspend the writ of habeas corpus not the President. This also went ignored by Lincoln.


It's speculated (and speculated is the operative word) that Lincoln had signed an arrest warrant for Taney but didn't carry through with it. This article documents how that speculation came to be.

Something else interesting to note in that article is this snippet posted from a book written by a Taney Biographer, Charles W. Smith:


Without the sanction of law the federal government arrested men by the thousands and confined them in military prisons. The number of such executive arrests was certainly over 13,000, and it has been estimated to have been as high as 38,000 (Columbia Law Review, XXI, 527–28, 1921). This policy was bitterly criticized in some quarters, but it is generally assumed that the people as a whole supported the arrest policy.


Another documented example of that "can't happen America" that has already happened in America.

Also, this is a good source on the Ex parte Merryman Decision .



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 02:02 PM
link   
Yes it is "martial law" i appoligize for the mistake... lol... Thank You for responding, I still am confused and will research it further. FEMA would authorize Martial Law if needed correct????



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join