Next time please just give a part of the article and link the rest. So was Lincoln impeached by Congress for violating his oath and taking this unconsititional action?http://hometown.aol.com/gordonkwok/habeas_corpus.html
Please note that I am quoting from the same article at the same precise link.
http://hometown.aol.com/gordonkwok/habeas_corpus.html
Gordon Kwok
The Suspension of Habeas CorpusAnd Ex parte: Milligan
"Well, the only route that the Supreme Court could do to save Milligan's neck was to declare the law unconstitutional. The decision was a narrow 5 to 4 votes by the 9 Supreme Court Justices. The interesting coincident was that the majority 4 of the 5 votes were Lincoln appointees. The court opinion was written by Justice David Davis, Lincoln's old Eighth Circuit court friend from Illinois and Lincoln's 1860 presidential campaign manager, and concurred by Chief Justice Salmon Chase, Lincoln's ex-Secretary of Treasury, and Justices Noah Swayne, Samuel Miller and James Wayne."
Next time do not drag in and quote an idiot on AOL as a legal authority.
Next time at least find an "expert" who knows the difference between a UNANIMOUS decision and a 5-4 decision.
Kwok evidently has not bothered to READ the lengthy decision in Ex Parte Milligan, or he grossly misrepresents it. Kwok would have one believe that Davis wrote the opinion that held the military tribunal UNCONSTITUTIONAL and that Chief Justice Chase, and Justices Swayne, Miller, and Wayne concurred with Justice Davis in that holding, making up a 5-4 majority. Kwok has it bass-ackwards.
Of course, while you choose to lecture others about habeas corpus law, this proves conclusively that either you have not read Ex Parte Milligan, a basic, essential case, or you are unable to read and understand a court decision. This is not rocket science. The official published opinion includes the opinion of the court, and a CONCURRING opinion which is joined in by four justices. It does not require a law degree to notice that there is NO DISSENTING OPINION. The Opinion of the Court, when accompanied only by CONCURRING opinions, adds up to a UNANIMOUS decision.
EX PARTE MILLIGAN, 71 U.S. 2 (1866) (9-0)
DECEMBER TERM, 1866.
Ex Parte Milligan was decided UNANIMOUSLY. It was 9-zip.
The Court ruled UNANIMOUSLY that the trial of a civilian by a military tribunal while the civilian courts were open and functioning was UNLAWFUL.
ALL NINE JUSTICES HELD THE MILITARY TRIBUNAL TO BE UNLAWFUL.
IN ADDITION, FIVE OF THE JUSTICES HELD IT TO BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Those were DAVIS, GRIER, NELSON, CLIFFORD, and FIELD.
In a concurring opinion written by Chief Justice CHASE, joined by SWAYNE, MILLER, and WAYNE, these FOUR justices said, "But the opinion which has just been read goes further; and as we understand it, asserts not only that the military commission held in Indiana was not authorized by Congress, but that it was not in the power of Congress to authorize it; from which it may be thought to follow, that Congress has no power to indemnify the officers who composed the commission against liability in civil courts for acting as members of it. We cannot agree to this."
The CONCURRING justices are those who DISAGREED with the holding of the tribunal being UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Wayne (GA) was appointed by Jackson.
Nelson (NY) was appointed by Tyler.
Grier (PA) was appointed by Polk.
Clifford (ME) was appointed by Buchanan.
Chase (OH), Swayne (OH), Miller (IA), Davis (IL), and Field (CA) were appointed by Lincoln.
While Kwok says "the majority 4 of the 5 votes were Lincoln appointees," he is dead wrong.
Again, the majority was 9-0. Four justices CONCURRED with the decision, but only held the tribunal UNLAWFUL but not UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Three of those four were Lincoln appointees. Two of the five who found the act UNCONSTITUTIONAL were LINCOLN appointees.
Find a different "expert." Preferably, find one whose "qualifications" include more than an AOL account.
Below is for the lurkers who cannot make any sense of your babbling.
Did President Lincoln suspend the U.S. Constitution?
Answer: No
Did President Lincoln suspend Habeas Corpus?
Answer: Yes, in 1861 and 1862
Was Habeas Corpus ever restored?
Answer: Yes, in 1866.
Here's the story:
As the Civil War started, in the very beginning of Lincoln's presidential term, a group of "Peace Democrats" proposed a peaceful resolution to the developing Civil War by offering a truce with the South, and forming a constitutional convention to amend the U.S. Constitution to protect States' rights. The proposal was ignored by the Unionists of the North and not taken seriously by the South. However, the Peace Democrats, also called copperheads by their enemies, publicly criticized Lincoln's belief that violating the U.S. Constitution was required to save it as a whole. With Congress not in session until July, Lincoln assumed all powers not delegated in the Constitution, including the power to suspend habeas corpus. In 1861, Lincoln had already suspended civil law in territories where resistance to the North's military power would be dangerous. In 1862, when copperhead democrats began criticizing Lincoln's violation of the Constitution, Lincoln suspended habeas corpus throughout the nation and had many copperhead democrats arrested under military authority because he felt that the State Courts in the north west would not convict war protesters such as the copperheads. He proclaimed that all persons who discouraged enlistments or engaged in disloyal practices would come under Martial Law.
Among the 13,000 people arrested under martial law was a Maryland Secessionist, John Merryman. Immediately, Hon. Roger B. Taney, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States issued a writ of habeas corpus commanding the military to bring Merryman before him. The military refused to follow the writ. Justice Taney, in Ex parte MERRYMAN, then ruled the suspension of habeas corpus unconstitutional because the writ could not be suspended without an Act of Congress. President Lincoln and the military ignored Justice Taney's ruling. Finally, in 1866, after the war, the Supreme Court officially restored habeas corpus in Ex-parte Milligan, ruling that military trials in areas where the civil courts were capable of functioning were illegal.
As for Congress, the question you raised was did Congress give support to what Lincoln did and they had by protecting his actions retroactivly in 1863