Posted on 09/05/2005 11:17:02 AM PDT by hypocrite
A Republic of Emergencies: Martial Law in American Jurisprudence
JASON COLLINS WEIDA Rhode Island Supreme Court
Connecticut Law Review, Vol. 36, 2004 Abstract:
A precise definition of martial law is near impossible.
The United States Constitution makes no reference to martial law, nor does any state constitution provide a working definition or model to implement martial law.
Current notions of martial law are a compilation of how different people have used martial law at different times. From an historical overview of martial law invocations, one can deduce that, first, martial law is a military power exercised during times of perceived crises. Second, martial law is an inward power, imposed on the citizens and in the territory of the government invoking martial law. Third, martial law seems to be a device, in intention at least, for the protection of the citizens it so drastically affects.
Yet abstract definitions do not provide a coherent framework of martial law, nor instruct the courts on how to determine the legality of the exercise of that extraordinary power.
This article begins by looking to Congress and state legislatures to provide a working definition of martial law. The law-making branch of the federal government, and its state counterparts, are best positioned to determine the boundaries of martial law in the absence of constitutional provisions. Accordingly, this article addresses acts of Congress and state statutes which bestow martial law authority on the President and state governors, respectively. Although martial law legislation provides the clearest boundaries of when martial law is permissible, it fails to provide a universal model for the implementation of martial law, if such a model exists at all. Legislation is usually limited to specific circumstances, triggered by certain events, or bound by the narrow reaches of a state or territory. The main thrust of this article evaluates the Supreme Court's review of martial law powers. The Court reviews instances of state and federal martial law in two distinct analyses. Each review reflects the different grants of power bestowed upon state and federal governments under the United States Constitution.
One tests the constitutionality of state invoked martial law through the application of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The other examines federal emergency measures purporting to be in accord with congressional authorization. Both attempt to harness the wayward exercise of extraordinary powers of American government; both have differing degrees of success. This article recommends a strategy to improve the Court's construction of emergency and martial law powers delegated by Congress to the Executive.
In New Orleans we are about to see citizens being forced to evacuate & abandon their homes, 'for their own protection', under provisions of martial law..
How far can we allow government to go in their intentions to protect us from all harm?
Or not...
If looking at the Dinosaurs Media is any indication. There are NO acceptable limits on the power of the Federal Govt as long as they "Mean well". The really scary thing about his past week has not been the Media hissy fit at Bush. What is REALLY scary is the fundamental lack of ANY understand on the part of all most ALL media (and quite a few Freepers) about JUST what ARE the limits on the President Powers and what he can, and cannot, do. apparently to far too many Americans, a President is suppose to be this god like figure who can fix any problem by just waggling his fingers at it and issuing a few orders. The idea that the people of New Orleans have ANY responsiblity seem to have completely disappeared
"Blogger"? bump.
New Orleans is flooded...It is "Null". Not a safe place to live, or be. Some NO residents are thugs, rapists, murderers. Doesn't matter what skin color. Going back to "see" may put a bullet in your head...and by a National Guardsman.
Not all of New Orleans is flooded.
Many people remain who are guarding their [and neighbors] property from looters. They have a right to do so, imo.
Well made points..
Thanks.
True. I just hope the people left don't expect personal bodyguards with the National Guard.
Those who choose to remain are not 'bodyguard' types.
With guns and generators, a few homeowners stand guard over neighbourhoods
Address:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1477768/posts
What Is Martial Law?And is New Orleans under it?
Address:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1477951/posts
bump
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.