Habeas Corpus and the Use of Military Tribunals
In America Under the Threat of Terrorism
Introduction
It was on this date one hundred forty two years ago (April 25, 1861), that President Abraham Lincoln sent a letter to Lt. General Winfield Scott authorizing the suspension of “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus” . Lincoln had been president for less than two months and was facing, what was up to that time and arguably may still be the greatest threat to the survival of the United States since the Founding Fathers launched this “Great Experiment”. Only eleven days earlier Major Robert Anderson, the commander of the federal garrison at Fort Sumter, South Carolina, had to surrender the fort to the Confederate Army. Lincoln was reluctant to issue such an order but had done so as he faced the very real possibility that the Maryland legislature would convene and “[t]ake action to arm the people of that state against the people of the United States” .
Thus began the first of several occasions in our nation’s history where a president when faced with a “clear and present danger” to our national security has had to balance fulfilling his oath to “[p]reserve, protect and defend the Constitution…” with the “privilege” to have any detainment reviewed by a judge or magistrate of competent jurisdiction.
Problem Statement
How far may law enforcement officials go in compromising civil liberties to enhance national security? What does the Constitution say with respect to the suspension of the civil liberties in times of national emergency? How has the U.S. Supreme Court interpreted the constitution with respect to the suspension of habeas corpus? Few citizens would disagree that national security is a legitimate function of government. First and foremost, our national government is responsible for the protection of life, then liberty. The most ardent champions of the Bill of Rights concede that it would be foolish to treat civil liberties as inviolable when the lives of innocent thousands are at stake. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson, dissenting in a free speech case, gave these words of warning regarding civil liberties:
“[T]he choice is not between order and liberty. It is between liberty with order and anarchy without either. There is danger that, if the Court does not temper its doctrinaire logic with a little practical wisdom, it will c...
... middle of paper ...
...lue – Freedom. Or it can be an indictment of our fear if we abrogate the liberties so much cherished and so dearly paid for.
Bibliography
Rehnquist, William H. All the Laws But One, New York: Alfred P. Knopf, 1998
Black’s Law Dictionary. Abridged Seventh Ed., p. 569, West Group, St. Paul, MN (2000)
Garret, Buck "The Unconstitutionality of Time Limits Placed on The Great Writ," Prisoner of War in America - http://www.nov.org/garret.May97.htm
Rembar, Charles. The Law of the Land: The Evolution of Our Legal System, pp.141 -156, Simon and Schuster, New York, (1981)
Kleinfeld, Joshua. "The Union Lincoln Made", p. 24, History Today, Vol. 47, Nov 1997.
Authorities and Cases Cited
U.S. Constitution, Article 1, § 9
Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949)
Ex Parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2 (1866)
Ex Parte Quiran, 317 U.S. 1 (1942)
Ashcroft, John. Statement to the Press re: The Capture of Jose Padilla, July 10, 2002
Padilla v. Bush, et al., 233 F. Supp. 2d 564 (S.D.N.Y. 2002)
Padilla v. Rumsfeld. 233 F. Supp. 2d 564, No. 02 Civ. 4445, 2003 U.S. Dist. (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 11, 2003)
Padilla v. Rumsfeld. 233 F. Supp. 2d 564, No. 02 Civ. 4445, 2003 U.S. Dist. (S.D.N.Y. Apr.9, 2003)
In Eric Foner’s book, The Story of American Freedom, he writes a historical monograph about how liberty came to be. In the book, his argument does not focus on one fixed definition of freedom like others are tempted to do. Unlike others, Foner describes liberty as an ever changing entity; its definition is fluid and does not change in a linear progress. While others portray liberty as a pre-determined concept and gradually getting better, Foner argues the very history of liberty is constantly reshaping the definition of liberty, itself. Essentially, the multiple and conflicting views on liberty has always been a “terrain of conflict” and has changed in time (Foner xv).
Written by John Wyndham, The Chrysalids tells the reader about Joseph and his life, which revolves around religion. Joseph, as the reader learns, is an extremely religious, authoritive, and temper mental man. As the story progresses, Joseph’s character traits begin to show more and more. Joseph’s character traits become more prominent, and Joseph begins to choose his religion over his family. Towards the end of the novel we learn that Joseph is out to kill two of his children. Joseph is a man with many problems, which would get the best of him in the end.
While most people in the West know the story of Joseph as a religious text from the book of Genesis and the Tanakh, it is crucial to realize that it is also a very important part of the Islamic faith when studying Western religion. In the Koran, the story of Joseph is also told, however it yields a different meaning. The two different accounts of the story of Joseph in chapters 37 and 39 through 50 of the book of Genesis and in Surah 12 of the Koran both tell the same story of Joseph, but the significance of each telling is different for every religion. By reading the two different accounts of the story, one can gain a clear and knowledgeable understanding of what is regarded as important to the Christian, Jewish, and Islamic faith.
In Supreme Court cases, it is difficult to determine which side the judges will rule because the cases are often very controversial. The Constitution and one’s rights need to be protected, and if it goes against the Constitution, the consequences will not be agreed upon. As a result, in Holmes’ analysis, it ultimately brings to light the importance of results often being black and white, but they truly aren’t. The public still has a long way to go in not only understanding the law, but also the reasons why judges make these different decisions. But the most important thing is that the U.S. Constitution is always followed.
The Supreme Court should should affirm that the State of Texas has standing to challenge the immigration executive orders that have been placed as it has sustained multiple injuries that were caused by DAPA. DAPA directly imposed substantial costs associated with issuing additional driver’s licenses; it also required additional health care, law enforcement, and education expenditures. Even if only a small fraction of DAPA recipients applied for driver’s licenses, Texas would incur millions of dollars in costs and it would hurt its state economy. These injuries would easily allow Texas establish standing for any ordinary litigant. In addition Rumsfeld v. Forum for Acad. & Inst. Rights, Inc held that “One party with standing is sufficient to satisfy Article III’s case-or-controversy requirement.”
As John F. Kennedy, former US president, once said, “Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future” meaning that change is inevitable: it may come with loss or joy but living in the past for too long will not allow one to succeed. The Book Thief by Markus Zusak is narrated by Death and tells the story of Liesel Meminger who arrives in Molching in 1939 shortly before World War II. Liesel’s mother gives her up to live with Hans and Rosa Hubermann when the war starts progressing. In order to help Liesel overcome her brother’s death, Hans, her foster father, teaches Liesel how to read. Liesel grows a love for books, and steals them, alongside her best friend Rudy Steiner. Although, the
A V Dicey, Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution (10th ed 1964) 40.
Joseph as told in Reading the Old Testament, is called the Joseph cycle because Joseph is indisputably the main character in the story apart from chapter thirty eight (RTOT 104). Also told in Chronicle Of The Old Testament Kings, the underlying purpose of the narrative that runs from Genesis thirty-seven to fifty is to link the patriarchs to the story of Moses by explaining how and why Jacob and his sons left Canaan and settled in Egypt (29). Joseph whom was born with a special gift, the ability to interpret dreams, is the oldest son of Rachel and the most favored child of his father Jacob, who is also known as Israel. Joseph who had eleven other brothers was favored because he was the son of the wife Jacob had chosen and really cared for the
The tale revolves around the life of Liesel Meminger in her new family. The book starts off with Death talking as a narrator. Death claims that he has seen Liesel, also known as the Book Thief, several times. One time Death
The biblical account of Joseph perfectly encapsulated the truth of God’s sovereignty and His complete control over all circumstances. Throughout the story, Joseph found himself in many horrendous situations, but he acknowledged how they were all overseen by the Lord and were ultimately used to serve His greater purpose. Joseph was sold to slavery by his brothers and was taken away from his home to Egypt. However, he did not remain a slave. Instead, he would eventually gain prominence and become the second most powerful ruler after the pharaoh. When the Middle Eastern world suffered
Lakoff, George. "Introduction: In the Name of Freedom.” Whose Freedom? : The Battle over America's Most Important Idea. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2006. 3-9. Print
Joseph’s brother did not think that he was worthy of the attention that he later got
Which were seven years of great prosperity and seven years of famine that will spread all across the land. The pharaoh realized that God was with Joseph, so the Pharaoh put him in charge of gathering food and water, also with distributing it when the time came. Joseph had faith in God, so God was with them through the seven years of famine. Joseph had kids with an Egyptian woman, which he named after what God did for him. His leadership went on to make people happy due to his fairness and God’s presence. The faith in God helped Joseph and the people survive through the difficult times, while the interpretation of dreams made it easy for Joseph to have a good life without having to deal with what his brothers put him
The story of Joseph is considered as a model of the Prophets stories. It is also a lesson to all people. Moreover, it is existent in a completed sura in the Qur’an. Joseph had eleven brothers and his father, the Prophet Jacob, loved him very much. One day, Joseph saw in a dream that eleven planets, the sun, and the moon are bowing down to him. He told his father about his vision, and his father advised him to no tell the vision to his brothers because of their jealousy. Joseph’s brothers decided to throw their lovely brother in a deep well. They threw him there, but they claimed that the wolf ate their brother. Then, merchants took him from the deep well, and sold him cheaply to the king of Egypt. The king of Egypt “Aziz” asked his wife to take care of him. Joseph became young, and the king’s wife loved him and she tried to seduce him. However, the Prophet Joseph refused her command, and he entered the prison. After many years, Joseph God showed his innocence and was released from the prison. He worked with the king for Egypt’s economy. He was a good manager in the drought
Ultimately Durkheim was a strong believer that it is society that defines the individual rather than the individual shaping society. For this reason we can clearly see why Durkheim was highly concerned with growing individualism in society, within a society which he believes shapes an individual therefore individuals are highly dependent on society. This can be seen in Durkheim’s theory of the division of labour. Durkheim argues that in a primitive society which is a society which is seen as having more morals and was a much better society to live in this is because society is seen as having deteriorated as civilisation has developed and become modernised. The division of labour within a primitive society therefore is to create or maintain a mechanical social solidarity in which there is a common consensus which allows social order to be maintai...