[erikmalin]

Twice when I have debated people on Lincoln’s unconstitutional suspension of habeus corpus, they bring up the same point. I say that Justice Taney argued that Lincoln didn’t have the power to suspend habeus corpus because it is a power that is in the section of the Constitution dealing with the President and his powers, not the section dealing with Congress. They then bring up the Habeas Corpus Suspension Act 1863 made by Congress soon after. Does this mean that the delay between when Lincoln suspended habeus corpus and when Congress approved of what Lincoln did mean that what Lincoln did was no big deal?

[gutzmank]

You’ve made a little mistake: it’s in Article I, the congressional portion of the Constitution, not Article II, “the section of the Constitution dealing with the [p]resident and his powers.” Why would it be in Article II, indeed, when the right to the writ of habeas corpus is a limitation on presidential powers? We wouldn’t expect the president to be the one who could waive it.

Of course Congress’s suspending it in 1863 doesn’t vitiate objections to Lincoln’s behavior in 1861.

[erikmalin]

Oops. I misspoke on that. Thanks for your reply. That’s all I needed.

[gutzmank]

You’re welcome.

[Author]

Posts