Essay on Civil Liberties, Habeas Corpus

During the next few years the Bill of Rights began to be accepted by the

President Abraham Lincoln said, “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Lincoln was talking about how the people control the government, and the people should not try to overthrow the government (since they control it). The Magna Carta blazed the trail for due process, coming out of a tyranny. John Locke brought about the ideas of natural rights, while the Mayflower Compact showed that a group of people could work together to be part of a thriving, self-government. The Magna Carta, John Locke, and the Mayflower Compact’s idea on government; which influenced the American government, by its ideas on rights and the social contract, made American society want to gain rights and make a fair, equal government, due to the British government restricting rights.

Habeas Corpus in its most familiar form has played an important role in “Anglo American history as a safe guard of individual liberty. It is defined as being a writ directed by a judge to some person who is detaining another, commanding him to bring the body of the person in his custody at a specified time and a specified place for a specified purpose. In contemporary practice, the writ is most commonly used to challenge the legality of criminal convictions and sentence, though it is also used to challenge the legality of custody in other settings, including immigration, mental health, and military contexts.

From the beginning, the United States Constitution has guaranteed the American people civil liberties. These liberties have given citizens rights to speak, believe, and act freely. The Constitution grants citizens the courage to express their mind about something they believe is immoral or unjust. The question is, how far are citizens willing to extend the meanings of these liberties? Some people believe that American citizens take advantage of their civil liberties, harming those around them. On the contrary, many other people feel that civil liberties are necessary tools to fight for their Constitutional rights.

There are five main positions on how the courts should view civil liberties during war time: success, no exception, maybe, dilemma, and living constitution. “Success” is the “whatever it takes to win” approach, meaning that rights given to the individual by the US constitution can be revoked during wartime. “No exception” is the opposite to the success approach, meaning that no matter what an individual’s rights cannot be revoked at any time for any reason. The stance of “maybe” means if there is an immediate threat then

Throughout American history, the writ of habeas Corpus has been the basis of the legal system of the United States, meant to preserve civil freedoms. Habeas corpus established a constitutional check on any dictatorial power that tried to present itself. It allowed any individual that was arrested to stand in front of the court to challenge whether they were being imprisoned according to the law of the land, ensuring their civil liberties weren 't threatened; however, only in times when the stability of a country was threatened could it be temporarily suspended. President Lincoln came into office in 1861 and by the

"So when Lincoln suspended the writ of Habeas corpus in order to arrest those accused of treason, the "Peace Democrats" had more ammunition against the president. There was much controversy as to whether the president had the power to suspend habaes corpus, and it was argued that only Congress had that right. The writ of habeas corpus protects people from arbitrary arrest and detainment. The power to do so was both that of the legislative branch as well as the judicial branch. It was unclear whether the Philadelphia convention placed it in Article I, just to identify it or define it as a legislative function. Either way, Lincoln did so, and the suspension of the writ of Habeas corpus brought on thousands of arbitrary arrests. Many of those who were arrested were spies, foreigners and smugglers. The question is: Did Lincoln go too far and unlawfully exercise his executive powers to manipulate constitutional limits?

Blackstone said that the writ of habeas corpus is the most celebrated and venerated of the English law. The US constitution therefore carried this important aspect and thus federal courts were authorized to issue writs of habeas corpus in all cases where a person may be restrained of his or her liberty in violation of the constitution, or any treaty or law of the United States. Chemerinsky (1987) in a detailed study of the operation of the writ of Habeas Corpus says that there are four major considerations in the issue related to the writ. There is the need to consider the separation of powers--the operation of the criminal justice system, the national litigations involved, and the scope of federalism. All these are affected by the changes in the abrogation of the fundamental right, and rule of law. (Chemerinsky, 1987)

In order to understand rights and liberties during wartime situations, some background information needs to be addressed and explained. This paper will explain the definition of habeas corpus and the role of the Judicial, Legislative and Executive Branches of government during wartime and conflicts, how the President will sometimes take matter into his own hands.

After the Revolution, the States adopted their own constitutions, many of which contained a Bill of Rights. The Americans still faced the challenge of creating a central government for their new nation. In 1777 the Continental Congress adopted the Articles of Confederation, which were ratified in 1781. Under the Articles, the states retained their “sovereignty, freedom and independence,” while the national government was kept weak and inferior. Over the next few years it became evident that the system of government that had been chosen was not strong enough to completely settle and defend the frontier, regulating trade, currency and commerce, and organizing thirteen states into one union.

POL 201 Week 5 Final Paper Civil Liberties, Habeas Corpus, and the War on Terror

Habeas corpus was suspended in history. The first time was done by President Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War. He imprisoned Confederate sympathizers for no reason other than their Confederate sympathies. He arrested them because he thought they were a threat and used the ““unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion” clause to do so. He began

On September 15, 1863 President Abraham Lincoln temporarily suspended Habeas Corpus, which is the right to due process. Anyone who was a confederate sympathiser or spoke out against the war were arrested, put in jail and weren 't given a trial until after the war was over. Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus because he wanted to suppress dissenters to strengthen the War effort. More than 13,000 civilians in the Union were arrested under martial law throughout the War. Lincoln viewed his action as justified since he believed the country was in a time of crisis.

A paradox has always exists between the issue of civil liberties and national security. Democracy creates civil liberties that allow the freedom of association, expression, as well as movement, but there are some people use such liberal democracy to plan and execute violence, to destabilize State structures. It illustrates the delicate balance existing between reducing civil liberties to enhance security in a state. States have detained suspects for years and have also conducted extensive privacy incursions as strategies to combat terror, however it risks violation of civil liberties. This essay discusses the extent to which a state should be allowed to restrict civil liberties for the enhancement of national security and not abandon democratic values. It looks at aspects of the legal response to terrorism in the United States after the 9/11 attack.

All through American history there have been many debates on whether during war times rights can be suspended or not. On April 27th 1861 Abraham Lincoln suspended the Writ of Habeas Corpus, he did this under the justification of the start of the Civil War.Franklin D. Roosevelt also suspended the writ of Habeas Corpus for Japanese-Americans during World War 2, this was not the last time this happened two other presidents have suspended the Writ of Habeas Corpus they were Bill Clinton and George Bush. Although the framers did allow for the removal of rights it is a long laborious process. Due Process was first stated in the fifth amendment, it is written as no person may “be deprived of life,