Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
That's not my point, though. The point is that no one, president, congress, or the FDA can suspend habeas unless we are being invaded or are at civil war. The fact that was ignored is a new precedent, the dangerous precedent of which I speak.
|
Although I'm not making it, the argument could be made that an attack on American soil (9/11) constitutes an invasion. Semantics.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
April 27, 1861 was the first suspension, not September 1862. He suspended the writ along the Philly-Washington route because Confederates stopped the Union troops from reaching a train station and caused a riot.
|
Wellll...
actually he did supend Habeus Copus in April 1861. But... it was localized (Maryland), and it was a tactical move. He had several members of the Maryland legislature jailed so that they couldn’t vote to secede from the Union. If Maryland
had seceded, then Washington would've been surrounded, and in enemy territory.
Arguably a little different than abusing power to quiet your detractors and opposition.