Civil Liberties, Habeas Corpus, and the War on Terror Essay

1777 Words Sep 2nd, 2013 8 Pages
Civil Liberties, Habeas Corpus, and the War on Terror
POL 201
April 15, 2013

Civil Liberties, Habeas Corpus, and the War on Terror

Civil liberties, Habeas Corpus, and the War on Terror have been the forefront of Congress since 2001 with the terrorist

attack against The United States. Although there have been many attacks before, none have hit the American people in

such a manner to question whether our civil liberties are at stake. As a member of the Armed Forces I swore to support

and defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies both foreign and domestic at all cost. A sense of

pride, loyalty and commitment engulfs me when I hear the words for equal justice and liberty for all when it comes
…show more content…
President Bush's action drew severe

criticism, mainly for the law's failure to specifically designate who in the United States will

determine who is and who is not an enemy combatant. This however was not the first time in the

history of the U.S. Constitution that it’s guaranteed right to Habeas Corpus has been suspended

by an action of the President of the United States. In earlier years of the U.S. Civil War,

President Abraham Lincoln suspended writs of habeas corpus. Both presidents based their action

on the dangers of war, and both presidents faced sharp criticism for carrying out what many

believed to be an attack on the Constitution. President Bush suspended writs of habeas corpus

through his support and signed into law the Military Commissions Act of 2006. This bill granted

the President of the United States almost unlimited authority in establishing and conducting

military commissions to try persons held by the U.S. in the Global War on Terrorism. In addition,

the Act suspends the right of "unlawful enemy combatants" to present, or to have presented in

their behalf, writs of habeas corpus.

“Members of volunteer corps, militias, and organized resistance forces that are not part of

the Armed Forces are entitled to POW status if they meet the criteria specified in the treaty.

Groups that do not meet the standards are not entitled to POW status, and their members who

commit…