A presidential executive order is an instruction issued by the President of the United States in exercising the constitutional authority vested in him to pass executive orders. This authority is derived from Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States of America, which means the presidential executive order has the power to become a law. Presidents have been mostly using presidential executive orders to issue directives in regard to managing the ways in which the federal government functions. Thus, presidents usually issue executive orders for the purpose of changing or improving the operations of the executive branch and federal agencies and to execute constitutional or statutory presidential duties and tasks. It is in this context that this paper makes a detailed analysis of President Lincoln's Suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus, which was issued on 27 April 1861. It is noteworthy that during the 148 years after the civil war ended in America, many attempts have been made by scholars to examine the conduct of President Lincoln. Moreover, his action in issuing the Suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus was also not analyzed comprehensively during the Civil War. However, in spite of the controversies created by the presidential executive order after the end of the Civil War, detailed scrutiny has not yet been made on the issue. Habeas corpus is the right that citizens have in civil proceedings whereby they have to be informed of the criminal charges framed against them and the legal basis under which imprisonment orders have been given. As per Article 2, Section 1, Clause 8 of the Constitution, habeas cannot be suspended except under circumstances when the country is faced with threats of public ... ... middle of paper ... ...u/j/jala/2629860.0029.205?rgn=main;view=fulltext Helms, Harry. Executive Orders: Inside the Shadow Government, 2003, Web. 18 Nov. 2013. http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/FBI/Executive_Orders_ITSG.html Manuell, David. Abraham Lincoln, the Writ of Habeas Corpus, and Civil Liberties, 2013. Web. 18 Nov. 2013. condor.depaul.edu/.../Abraham_Lincoln_and_the_Writ_of_Habeas_Cor The American Presidency Project. Abraham Lincoln: Executive Order dated April 27, 1861. 1999. Web.18 Nov. 2013. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=69748 White, Jonathan W. "The Lincoln Administration And The Supreme Court During The Civil War: A Letter By Attorney General Edward Bates." Journal Of Supreme Court History 37.3 (2012): 261-265. Academic Search Complete. Web. 18 Nov. 2013.
In Mark R. Levin’s book, THE LIBERTY AMENDMENTS, he proposes amendments to the Constitution called “The Liberty Amendments” (Levin 18). His hope for producing this book of proposed amendments is to “spur interest in and, ultimately, support for the state convention process.” (Levin 18). Levin states he undertook this project because he believes the way that the Constitution, as originally structured, “is the necessity and urgency of restoring constitutional republicanism and preserving the civil society from the growing authoritarianism of federal Leviathan” (Levin 1). Levin believes that the Congress operates in a way that was not intended by the Framers of our country, and has become oppressive to its people in its laws (Levin 3). He also
I. Facts: 15-year-old delinquent, Gerald Gault and a friend were arrested after being accused of making a lewd phone call to a neighbor. Gerald’s parents were not notified of the situation. After a hearing, the juvenile court judge ordered Gerald to surrender to the State Industrial School until he reached the age of minority (21). Gerald's attorney petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus challenging the state of Arizona for violating the juvenile’s 14th Amendment due process rights. The Superior Court of Arizona and the Arizona State Supreme Court both dismissed the writ affirmatively deciding that the juvenile’s due process rights were not violated.
Lynch vs. Clarke (1844) was the most important case before the passage of the Fourteenth amendment dealing with this matter. It involved the discussion of whether Julia Lynch was a citizen or not. The nature of this case meant that she must either have been born a natural born citizen because she was born to her parents, that although were aliens, on U.S. soil, or that she was not a citizen at all because her parents were aliens regardless of the place of her birth that she had never made any attempt to be naturalized. The court ruled in her favor. The ruling established that under the common law of England, Julia Lunch would be considered a natural born citizen of the U.S., the common law of England formed the basis
...e police officers. Miranda established the precedent that a citizen has a right to be informed of his or her rights before the police attempt to violate them with the intent that the warnings erase the inherent coercion of the situation. The Court's violation of this precedent is especially puzzling due to this case's many similarities to Miranda.
Miranda vs. Arizona was a case that considered the rights of the defendants in criminal cases in regards to the power of the government.
Rostow, Eugene V., "Great Cases Make Bad Law: The War Powers Act" (1972). Faculty Scholarship Series. Paper 2143.
During the Abraham Lincoln’s short time as president, he managed not only to save a nation deeply divided and at war with itself, but to solidify the United States of America as a nation dedicated to the progress of civil rights. Years after his death, he was awarded the title of ‘The Great Emancipator.’ In this paper, I will examine many different aspects of Lincoln’s presidency in order to come to a conclusion: whether this title bestowed unto Lincoln was deserved, or not. In order to fully understand Lincoln, it is necessary to understand the motives that drove this man to action. While some of his intentions may not have been for the welfare of slaves, but for the preservation of the Union, the actions still stand. Abraham Lincoln, though motivated by his devotion to his nation, made the first blows against the institution of slavery and rightfully earned his title of ‘The Great Emancipator.’
"Treason, Sedition and Civil Rights in the U. S. Law." Congressional Digest 14.10 (1935): 227-
Perhaps one of the most interesting times in a president’s administration is during the end of his term in office. Having reached the ultimate goal in a politician’s career, a president no longer has to worry about public opinion or any of the other political give and takes that usually influence a politician’s actions. He is truly free to act as he pleases almost free of consequences. Bill Clinton’s final days in office certainly demonstrated this fact. Using the ultimate unchecked executive power of clemency Clinton issued over 140 pardons and thirty six sentence commutations. He protected over a million acres of land through the creation of six new national monuments. He also nominated nine new federal judges. Clinton also issued a number of executive orders during this time. Unlike most previous presidents who laid low during their last days in office, Clinton was in a flurry of activity trying to exert some last bit of influence from his office. The reasons for his actions are wide spread, ranging from political to personal. The results of his actions were extensive, affecting many situations in the American political and judicial realms. The final days of Clinton administration may be the most controversial of a presidency that was full of tumult and plagued by scandals.
we had no legally protected rights of free speech in anything like the form we
According to the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, the government is not allow to take away any individual’s life, liberty or property without a fair due process of law. Within the due process we can find the substantive and procedural process (Wasserman, 2004). The substantive put limits on the government actions such as interfering with certain personal basic interest. However, the procedural process protects the accused individual’s rights by ensuring that such person has the opportunity to be heard, and get a fair trial.
Geoffrey R. Stone in his book tries to give us a larger picture look at the history of the First Amendment during major periods of war. Stone states that “the United States has attempted to punish individuals for criticizing government officials or policies only during six episodes in our history.” Stone breaks down the six periods into two categories of rights suppression; Intense suppression periods which consist of militant agitation against France in 1798, World War I and the Cold War and less intense suppression which encompasses the Civil War, World War II, and the Vietnam War. This book mainly focuses on each of these periods.
The reconstruction period of United States history is a direct outcome of the conclusion of the Civil War. Philosophies generated within the reconstruction period on the part of the Republican Party, resulted in the creation of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments respectively. Did the government however, continue to reinforce the values perpetuated through the creation of these amendments, following their establishment? If not what implications do these interpretations have for 21st century constitutional conflicts regarding civil rights and civil liberties? This paper sheds light on the answers to the above-mentioned questions through a thorough examination of the 1873 Slaughterhouse Cases and
The book raises the importance of, and questions, the writ of habeas corpus. Carter used a writ of habeas corpus to get a federal trial. Many question the legality of Carter going into federal jurisdiction, when his case should have been heard before the Supreme Court of New Jersey. It was a gamble, but the federal judge gave fair justice to Carter and Artis. The State of New Jersey appealed the case all the way to the United States Supreme Court, which upheld the District Court’s ruling.
The power of the Executive branch has expanded over time to become the most authoritative division of government. In contrast to the Constitution 's fundamental designer, James Madison, who predicted the Legislative branch would dominate due to it’s power in making laws and regulating taxes/spending, the executive powers have proven to be superior and ever broadening. From the birth of the Republic, the President has sought to protect his rights and seek beyond his restriction of power. Setting the precedent as early as 1795, George Washington refused to relay documents relating to the Jay Treaty to the House of Representatives and saw his actions as a justified act of “executive prerogative.” Moreover, weaving throughout the Nineteenth century, presidents such as Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln conceived and added functions, such as the extensive use of the veto and the president’s direct and active role as Commander in Chief to their executive tool-belt. The Constitution communicates very little details regarding the President’s use of the power of veto and the role as Commander in Chief, but it was these presidents which established the major authority of the executive branch in these areas.