By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 17 February 2009
Edit Thread
akuma587 said:
Kasz216 said:
akuma587 said:
I agree with Kasz that the ends don't justify the means. But comparing fighting WW2 to fighting the Civil War is an inappropriate comparison in many ways. The Constitution says that if the war is on American soil that the President has more leeway.

Article I - Section 9

The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

Last i saw the ruling on that was only Congress could suspend the Writ of Habeas Corpus and that Lincoln violated the constitution when he did so.

Not that Lincoln and the court were on good terms.  Lincoln claiming the Supreme Court's mere existance violated the Constitution.

I mean your the law student... but I'd like to see the judgement otherwise if that has since been revised.

See Ex Parte Merryman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_merryman

Infact from what i can tell.  Congress being the only body that can suspend the writ is still the case.

Unfortunately I haven't had much Constitutional Law yet.  Otherwise I would help you fill in the details.  Suspending habeas corpus in modern times depends a lot on the status of the people who you are suspending habeas corpus for.

If they are a "lawful combatant", then it appears Congress is the only one who can suspend it.

If you are an "unlawful combatant" (the definition of which changes fairly often depending on what decade we are in) then the President can suspend habeas corpus for that person, but usually only for a short or depending on the circumstances reasonable period of time.

There is still a pretty big debate over how far exactly commander in cheif powers go.  So honestly the answer isn't even that clear.  When the commander in cheif is trying to invoke his commander in cheif powers during peacetime here in America, they are at their most limited.  He has a lot more flexibility abroad.  During wartime on American soil, he has a lot more flexibility.

So it appears at the time it didn't include suspending habeas corpus.  Once again though, it was during wartime on American soil.  Its not like they were ruling on a non-criminal domestic issue or something.  I don't really have a vested interest in whether Lincoln or Washington is ranked at number one.  I definitely think in spite of his faults Lincoln deserves to be in the top 5 though.  Show me one President that got anything done in office that doesn't have some dirty laundry and I'll be genuinely impressed.