Mirror of Justice - All about Law and More
*Home>>>Civil Rights Law

Under what circumstances or of what Act was habeas corpus suspended?


what act allowed for habeas corpus to be suspended under the bush administration? if it was the patriot act, how could that be? if it was under homeland security rules, how did it happen? why did it happen?

yes, i know about GITMO. but tell me exactly why habeas corpus was suspended in bush's administration. when, how and why? and why was it only recently restored?

as far as i know, the president does not have a right to suspend any article of the constitution or amendment thereto--only congress could, yes? or no? why or why not?

please no sarcasm. if you like to say it in one line, that won't do it for me, i will thumb you down. explain what you know.

PS: i heard tell about lincoln suspending it during the civil war, and i find a lot of research on that one. but i also heard that it was suspended during WWII to inter japanese citizens and some german citizens, but can't find much on that one. and i heard that it was suspended at some other time, but when, where, how & why?

Habeus Corpus has never been suspended during the current administration.

It was the governments position that the detainees in Gitmo, since they were not American citizens or residents, were not arrested within the US, and were not detained within the US, were beyond the reach of a Habeus Corpus writ issued by a US court. The Supreme Court disagreed.

Likewise, Habeus Corpus was not suspended during WWII either. The internment of Japanese civilians was done under the authority of a military order. (Order 9066) In 1944 the US Supreme Court held that the internment of American citizens with as little as 1/16 Japanese ancestry was constitutional as a "Military Necessity", based on a government report written by the military and released by the Democratic Party administration.

In 1980 a copy of the original military report was found in the National archives, and it was found that, in fact, the military had said there was no military necessity at all to remove and detain US citizens of Japanese ancestry. The Japanese community at the time, however, was solidly Republican, and California was an important swing State - it was Democrat even then, but narrowly so. The Democrats therefore re-wrote the military report to justify removing the Japanese, cementing their control over CA in the 1942 elections.

Richard

Tags
  Collections Law   Consumer Law   Construction Law   Constitutional Law   Computer Law   Child Custody   Civil Rights Law   Business Law   Bankruptcy Law   Banking Law   Aviation Law   Appeals and Writs
Related information
  • What gives people the right to reproduce?

    to The Golden Buffalo, the right to reproduce is not the same as the right to eat. You eat if you can afford it. Just as it should be with children. You can have them if you can afford them. There ...

  • Is it a must to establish a Fetal Civil Registration?

    not remotly possible under US law

    ...
  • Violation of civil rights?

    You might try reading 2e. Also read 3. This document does NOT support your position.

    ...
  • Civil Rights question?

    It's only unlawful discrimination under federal law if you have been treated less favorably because of your race, color, sex, national origin, disability or age (over 40). Favoritism toward an...

  • Should we have less civil rights, and more punishment - as a way of reducing crime?

    Stiff penalties are the answer. Look what happened when the got really serious with the drunk driving penalties. Drunk driving went way down. In Nj it is nothing to get 10 years for murder. 1...

  • Does a failure to extradite violate a defendant's civil rights?

    No, there is no violation of civil rights. If Georgia won't extradite, it doesn't affect his right to a speedy trial because he obviously failed to appear in court when he was supposed to...

  • Who enforces State and Federal laws when Civil Rights, when State Employees are the VIOLATORS?

    The people whose rights are violated can enforce their rights with a 42 USC Section 1983 lawsuit (for violation of civil rights "under color of law). Also, the US Department of Justice has a ...

  • What is the best place to find a civil rights lawyer?

    Find your local ACLU affiliate here: ...

  •  

    Categories--Copyright/IP Policy--Contact Webmaster