Jonah Patel
The Constitution is not a suicide pact is a phrase in American political and legal discourse, often attributed to Abraham Lincoln, in reference to his suspension of habeas corpus during the American Civil War. The phrase expresses the belief that constitutional restrictions on governmental power must be balanced against the need for the survival of the state and its people. It has been used in debates about free speech, gun control, and national security, with some arguing that it justifies limiting or denying Constitutional rights for the safety of the republic. The phrase was popularised by Justice Robert Jackson in his dissenting opinion in the 1949 Supreme Court case Terminiello v. City of Chicago, and has been invoked by politicians and commentators to defend policies that restrict civil liberties in the name of national security or public safety.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Year of origin | 1949 |
| Originator | Justice Robert Jackson |
| Origin case | Terminiello v. City of Chicago |
| Origin context | A warning against the Supreme Court's reversal of a priest's conviction for inciting a riot, on the grounds of the First Amendment |
| Commonly attributed to | Abraham Lincoln |
| Commonly attributed case | Suspension of habeas corpus during the American Civil War |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
The origins of the phrase
In the Terminiello case, a Catholic priest's inflammatory rhetoric at a rally incited a riot, resulting in his conviction for breach of peace. However, the Supreme Court overturned the conviction, citing protection under the First Amendment. Justice Jackson, in his dissent, warned that if the Court did not balance constitutional rights with practical wisdom, it would "convert the constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact."
The phrase "The Constitution is not a suicide pact" gained further prominence in the 2006 book of the same name by Judge Richard Posner. Posner's work argued for balancing civil liberties with national security concerns, particularly in the context of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The phrase has since been invoked in various political and legal debates, including those surrounding gun control, immigration, and presidential power.
While the phrase is most closely associated with Justice Jackson and his dissenting opinion in Terminiello, it is important to recognize that the concept it conveys has precedents in American history. For example, President Jefferson, in the context of the Louisiana Purchase, expressed a similar sentiment when he stated that while upholding the written law was important, the laws of self-preservation and saving the country in times of danger took precedence.
The phrase "The Constitution is not a suicide pact" has become a powerful rhetorical tool in American political and legal discourse, reflecting the ongoing tension between constitutional rights and the practical considerations of governance, especially during times of crisis.
The Constitution's Take on Taxation Without Representation
You may want to see also
The 1949 Supreme Court case
The phrase "the Constitution is not a suicide pact" is a well-known legal aphorism in US law, often used to justify governmental actions that might otherwise be seen as infringing on constitutional rights during times of crisis. The phrase is derived from a concurring opinion by Justice Robert H. Jackson in the 1949 Supreme Court case Terminiello v. City of Chicago, which involved a You may want to see also The phrase "The Constitution is not a suicide pact" is a part of American political and legal discourse. It expresses the belief that constitutional restrictions on governmental power must be balanced against the need for the survival of the state and its people. The phrase is most often attributed to Abraham Lincoln, who invoked it in response to charges that he was violating the US Constitution by suspending habeas corpus during the American Civil War. Habeas corpus is the right of any person under arrest to appear in person before the court to ensure that they have not been falsely accused. The US Constitution specifically protects this right in Article I, Section 9, 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." At the outbreak of the American Civil War in April 1861, Washington, D.C., was largely undefended, and rioters in Baltimore, Maryland, threatened to disrupt the reinforcement of the capital by rail. Abraham Lincoln, the president of the United States, authorized his military commanders to suspend the writ of habeas corpus between Washington, D.C., and Philadelphia (and later up through New York City). Numerous individuals were arrested, including John Merryman and several Baltimore police commissioners, and the administration of justice in Baltimore was carried out through military officials. When Judge William Fell Giles of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland issued a writ of habeas corpus, the commander of Fort McHenry, Major W.S. Garrity, refused to comply, stating that Lincoln had authorized military officers to suspend the writ when there were public safety concerns. This led to a constitutional showdown between Lincoln and Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger Taney, who directly challenged the president's wartime suspension of habeas corpus in the Ex Parte Merryman case. Taney argued that only Congress had the power to suspend the writ of habeas corpus, not the president, and that Lincoln's suspension was unconstitutional. Lincoln defended his decision, arguing that acts that might be illegal in peacetime might be necessary "in cases of rebellion" when the nation's survival was at stake. The suspension of habeas corpus was one of Lincoln's most controversial decisions and sparked debates about the balance between national security and individual liberties. The phrase "The Constitution is not a suicide pact" reflects the tension between these two ideals. While the Constitution protects individual rights, it also recognizes that in extraordinary circumstances, like rebellion or invasion, temporary restrictions may be necessary to ensure the survival of the nation. This idea has been echoed by various legal and political figures throughout American history, including Justice Robert H. Jackson, who warned that "if the Court does not temper its doctrinaire logic with a little practical wisdom, it will convert the constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact." You may want to see also The phrase "the constitution is not a suicide note" is often attributed to the Indian politician and former Minister of Finance, P. Chidambaram. Chidambaram's statement, made in the context of discussing the balance between national security and civil liberties, has sparked a debate that resonates in the ongoing gun control discussions in the United States. In the United States, the Second Amendment of the Constitution protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms. This has been a subject of intense debate, with those advocating for stricter gun control measures often clashing with those who defend the unrestricted access to firearms. At the heart of this debate lies the tension between individual liberty and the collective need for safety and security. Proponents of stricter gun control argue that easy access to firearms contributes to the high rates of gun violence, including mass shootings, that plague the United States. They advocate for measures such as universal background checks, bans on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and stricter licensing and permitting processes. They believe that these measures are necessary to protect the public and reduce the devastating impact of gun violence on individuals, families, and communities. On the other hand, opponents of stringent gun control measures argue that any infringement on the right to bear arms is a violation of the Second Amendment. They believe that the focus should be on addressing the root causes of violence, such as mental health issues and social inequalities, rather than restricting access to firearms. They also argue that gun ownership is a deterrent to crime and that responsible, law-abiding citizens should not have their rights curtailed due to the actions of a few. Finding a resolution to the gun control debate requires a nuanced understanding of the complex interplay between individual rights and collective needs. It demands thoughtful consideration of the issues from all stakeholders, including policymakers, law enforcement, public health experts, and the general public. Ultimately, the goal is to forge a path that upholds the principles of the Constitution while also ensuring the safety and security of all Americans. You may want to see also The phrase "the Constitution is not a suicide pact" is a well-known quote often used in political and legal discourse, with a particular resonance in the context of national security and civil liberties. The quote is often invoked in discussions about the balance between individual freedoms and national security, especially during times of crisis or heightened security concerns, such as the War on Terror. You may want to see also The phrase is often attributed to Abraham Lincoln, in reference to his suspension of habeas corpus during the American Civil War. However, the first person to use the phrase in a legal context was Justice Robert H. Jackson in his dissenting opinion in the 1949 Supreme Court case Terminiello v. City of Chicago. Lincoln was accused of violating the United States Constitution by suspending habeas corpus during the American Civil War. The Confederacy was rebelling, which made the suspension of habeas corpus constitutional. However, it was not clear whether this power should be exercised by Congress or the president. Lincoln chose to exercise this power by executive order. The case involved a suspended Catholic priest, Arthur Terminiello, who gave a speech that sparked unrest and rioting. Terminiello was convicted of violating a Chicago ordinance against "breach of peace". Jackson warned in his dissent that "if the Court does not temper its doctrinaire logic with a little practical wisdom, it will convert the constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact".Understanding Church Constitution: Its Purpose and Function
The American Civil War and habeas corpus
The Constitution's Defense Provisions: Protecting the American People
Explore related products
The gun control debate
Oklahoma Constitution: A Surprisingly Wordy Document
The war on terror
Constitution Day: Freedom of Speech Explored
Frequently asked questions
