Lincoln's Habeus Corpus: Constitutional Crisis?

The suspension of habeas corpus was one of Abraham Lincoln's most controversial decisions as President of the United States. In 1861, at the outbreak of the American Civil War, Lincoln authorized his military commanders to suspend the writ of habeas corpus between Washington, D.C., and Philadelphia (and later New York City). This suspension was later extended. Habeas corpus is a legal procedure that prevents the government from holding an individual indefinitely without showing cause. Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus was challenged by Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger Taney, who issued a ruling, Ex parte Merryman, denying the president's authority to suspend habeas corpus. Taney argued that only Congress had the power to suspend the writ. Lincoln defended his actions, citing the need to suppress insurrection and ensure public safety during a time of rebellion. The constitutionality of Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus remains a subject of debate, with some arguing that he overstepped his executive powers while others justify his actions as necessary during a national emergency.

Explore related products

The Body of John Merryman: Abraham Lincoln and the Suspension of Habeas Corpus

$39.88 $42

A Nation So Conceived: Abraham Lincoln and the Paradox of Democratic Sovereignty (Constitutional Thinking)

$39.99 $59.99

Opposing Lincoln: Clement L. Vallandigham, Presidential Power, and the Legal Battle over Dissent in Wartime (Landmark Law Cases and American Society)

$29.99 $29.99

The Fate of Liberty: Abraham Lincoln and Civil Liberties

$20.84 $27.99

Habeas Corpus: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions)

$3.99 $4.79

Lincoln's Suspension of Habeas Corpus as Viewed by Congress

$29.95

Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus was controversial

Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus was one of his most controversial decisions. The suspension allowed the federal government to indefinitely detain individuals without trial or judicial oversight, a significant departure from established legal norms.

The Habeas Corpus Suspension Act of 1863, signed into law by President Abraham Lincoln, authorized the president to suspend the right of habeas corpus in response to the American Civil War. Habeas corpus, a legal right dating back to the Magna Carta in 1215, ensures that individuals cannot be detained indefinitely without appearing before a court to determine if they have been justly accused.

Lincoln first invoked the suspension in Maryland in 1861 to quell civilian riots and prevent Confederate troop movements towards Washington, D.C. He later expanded the suspension nationwide in 1862 to suppress opposition to the war and interference with the draft. This allowed him to subject protestors and dissenters to martial law, raising concerns about civil liberties and executive overreach.

The constitutionality of Lincoln's actions was hotly debated. Article I, Section 9 of the US Constitution states, "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." While some argued that the Civil War emergency justified the suspension, others, notably Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, asserted that only Congress had the power to authorize such a suspension, not the president acting unilaterally.

The controversy surrounding Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus has persisted, with scholars and historians offering differing interpretations of its legality and ethical implications. The lack of in-depth scholarly analysis of Lincoln's actions has contributed to ongoing debates about the balance between civil liberties and executive power during times of national crisis.

The Supreme Court challenged Lincoln's suspension

On May 28, 1861, Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger Taney directly challenged President Abraham Lincoln's suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. This challenge came in the form of a national constitutional showdown, known as "Lincoln and Taney's great writ showdown".

Taney issued a writ of habeas corpus and ordered General George Cadwalader, commander of Fort McHenry, to appear in the circuit courtroom along with John Merryman, a Maryland planter who had been arrested on suspicion of involvement in a conspiracy as part of an armed secessionist group. Cadwalader refused to comply with the writ, citing Lincoln's authorization for military officers to suspend the writ in cases of public safety concerns. In response, Taney attempted to hold Cadwalader in contempt of court, but soldiers at Fort McHenry refused to accept the notice.

On May 28, Taney issued an oral opinion, followed by a written opinion a few days later. He stated that the Constitution intended for Congress, not the President, to have the power to suspend the writ during emergencies. Taney argued that the suspension clause was located in Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution, which dealt with legislative powers rather than executive powers granted to the President in Article II. He also noted that the power to suspend habeas corpus had its origins in English law, where it was a legislative power held by the House of Commons, and that this tradition was embodied in the US Constitution.

Lincoln did not respond directly or immediately to Taney's decision in Ex Parte Merryman. Instead, he waited until a July 4 address to Congress, where he defended his actions as both necessary and constitutional. He argued that the policy of the government should not be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, and that the President held the power of suspension in certain cases.

Lincoln's defence of his suspension

Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus was one of his most controversial decisions. It was challenged by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney of Maryland, who issued a ruling, Ex parte Merryman, denying the president's authority to suspend habeas corpus. Taney argued that the suspension clause in the Constitution was devoted to the Legislative Department of the United States and had no reference to the Executive Department. He concluded that the President could not authorize the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus or arrest a citizen except to aid the judicial power.

Lincoln faced many difficulties due to the fact that Washington was located in slave territory, and Maryland had widespread Southern sympathies. He suspended the writ of habeas corpus between Washington, D.C., and Philadelphia to give military authorities the power to silence dissenters and rebels. In the summer of 1862, Lincoln called up the state militias, leading to increased opposition to the Civil War within the Union. He subjected protestors to martial law and the suspension of habeas corpus. Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus was authorized by the Habeas Corpus Suspension Act, which required actual indictments for suspected traitors.

Explore related products

The Habeas Corpus Manual

$23.67 $27.99

Lincoln's Suspension of Habeas Corpus as Viewed by Congress. pp.217-283. [pp.5-71]

$12.95

Habeas Corpus: From England to Empire

$28.49 $32

Winning Habeas Corpus & Post Conviction Relief, 9th Edition 2022

$89.5

A Review of the Argument of President Lincoln and Attorney General Bates, in Favor of Presidential Power to Suspend the Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus (Classic Reprint)

$29.57

Constitutional Law: [Connected eBook with Study Center] (Aspen Casebook)

$239.56 $359

Congress's power to suspend habeas corpus

The suspension of habeas corpus by President Abraham Lincoln during the American Civil War in 1861 has been a subject of debate among legal scholars. Lincoln's suspension of the writ of habeas corpus was challenged in court and overturned by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Maryland, led by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, in Ex parte Merryman.

Taney ruled that the suspension was unconstitutional and that only Congress had the power to suspend habeas corpus. He cited Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution, which states:

> "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."

Taney argued that the clause dealt with legislative powers, not executive powers, and that the President could not authorize the suspension of the writ or arrest a citizen except in aid of the judicial power. He noted that the historical precedent in English law placed the power to suspend habeas corpus in the hands of the legislative branch, and that eminent authorities such as Chief Justice John Marshall, Thomas Jefferson, and Joseph Story had acknowledged Congress's power to suspend.

Lincoln ignored Taney's ruling and defended his actions, arguing that the suspension was necessary due to the public safety concerns posed by the Civil War. When Congress met again in July 1861, it failed to support Lincoln's unilateral suspension, and a joint resolution to approve the suspension was blocked by Senate Democrats. In December 1862, the House of Representatives passed a bill indemnifying the president for his suspension of habeas corpus, but the Senate amended the bill to remove the indemnity and authorize Congress to suspend habeas corpus on its own authority. This bill, the Habeas Corpus Suspension Act, was signed into law on March 3, 1863, and Lincoln exercised his powers under it in September, suspending habeas corpus throughout the Union for prisoners of war, spies, traitors, and military personnel.

The debate over Congress's power to suspend habeas corpus centers on the interpretation of the Constitution, specifically Article I, Section 9, also known as the Suspension Clause. The Clause allows for the suspension of habeas corpus in cases of rebellion or invasion when public safety requires it. While some scholars argue that the President has the power to suspend habeas corpus in these circumstances, others maintain that only Congress possesses this authority, and unilateral suspensions by the President are unconstitutional.

The constitutionality of Lincoln's suspension

The suspension of habeas corpus was one of Abraham Lincoln's most controversial decisions. In 1861, at the outbreak of the American Civil War, Lincoln authorized his military commanders to suspend the writ of habeas corpus between Washington, D.C., and Philadelphia (and later up through New York City). This was due to fears of a rebellion in Maryland that would endanger Washington.

The writ of habeas corpus is a legal procedure that prevents the government from holding an individual indefinitely without showing cause before a court. Article 1, Section 9 of the US Constitution states that:

> 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.

Lincoln justified his suspension of habeas corpus through this clause, arguing that the suspension was necessary due to the rebellion and invasion of the public safety. However, the Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger Taney directly challenged Lincoln's suspension in Ex Parte Merryman, ruling that Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution reserves the power to suspend habeas corpus to Congress, not the President.

Taney argued that the clause in the Constitution dealing with the suspension of habeas corpus was in the section on legislative powers, not executive powers, and that the President had very limited powers that were further weakened by the Bill of Rights. Lincoln ignored Taney's ruling, and Congress was called into a special session on July 4, 1861, where Lincoln issued a message defending his actions, including the suspension of habeas corpus.

In March 1863, Lincoln signed the Habeas Corpus Suspension Act into law, which authorized the president to suspend the right of habeas corpus and provided for the release of political prisoners. However, Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus continued to be controversial, and in 1863, General Ambrose Burnside arrested Peace Democrat Clement Vallandigham, who had been critical of the US government. Lincoln reduced Vallandigham's sentence and revoked Burnside's order, but he continued to face charges that his administration had subverted the Constitution.

Frequently asked questions