Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

American History

Showing Original Post only (View all)

NNadir

(35,103 posts)
Thu Oct 24, 2024, 11:01 AM Oct 2024

Lincoln and Taney's great writ showdown [View all]

Considering the fact that we have a Supreme Court, stuffed, by the unprecedented (and blatantly dishonest_ abandonment of precedent by the likes of Mitch McConnell, with perjuring political hacks and bribed thugs holding the Constitution in contempt, I was reminded of the time that our greatest President confronted a virulent Supreme Court, refusing to obey the ruling of Ex Parte Merryman.

The Constitution Center has a web page devoted to the point. Lincoln and Taney’s great writ showdown

Lincoln's comment to Congress is quoted:

...Lincoln didn’t respond directly or immediately to the Ex Parte Merryman decision. Instead, he waited until a July 4th address to confront Taney at a special session of Congress.

“Soon after the first call for militia it was considered a duty to authorize the Commanding General in proper cases, according to his discretion, to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, or, in other words, to arrest and detain without resort to the ordinary processes and forms of law such individuals as he might deem dangerous to the public safety,” Lincoln said. “This authority has purposely been exercised but very sparingly.”

Lincoln then presented his famous response to Taney. “Are all the laws but one to go unexecuted, and the Government itself go to pieces lest that one be violated? Even in such a case, would not the official oath be broken if the Government should be overthrown when it was believed that disregarding the single law would tend to preserve it?”

The President also confronted Taney’s opinion that only Congress could suspend the writ.

“Now it is insisted that Congress, and not the Executive, is vested with this power; but the Constitution itself is silent as to which or who is to exercise the power; and as the provision was plainly made for a dangerous emergency, it can not be believed the framers of the instrument intended that in every case the danger should run its course until Congress could be called together, the very assembling of which might be prevented, as was intended in this case, by the rebellion,” Lincoln argued...


I hope we do not come to having this question before us:

“Are all the laws but one to go unexecuted, and the Government itself go to pieces lest that one be violated? Even in such a case, would not the official oath be broken if the Government should be overthrown when it was believed that disregarding the single law would tend to preserve it?”


We should note that judicial review is extra-Constitutional although well established by precedent in Marbury vs. Madison. However, we have never observed in our history a highly politicized court with members openly being bribed.

Roberts will be lucky if he is not regarded by history, should honest history survive, as even worse than Taney, not that Roberts seems to give a shit about historical or other dignity.
5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»American History»Lincoln and Taney's great...»Reply #0