[Keith]

I understand what you are saying...since Lincoln was CIC in a case of open rebellion he had to act. If this was such a craven theft of Congress' powers,why didn't Congress act upon Taney's ruling? I'm just saying that in a situation where if Maryland had seceeded, DC would have been surrounded by enemy territory, Lincoln did what he had to and Congress was grateful for his prompt action in those circumstances. Which is why both the Executive and Legislative branches were all to happy to ignore Taney's ruling. In a final word on this whole mess, I hardly ever hear anyone cite how unconstitutional the south's action was. How so, you say? Again, look to your constitution... Article I, Section 10...No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; " I just think that for a document which covers so much, procedures for leaving the Union are never covered... This is fun guys, thanks for the intellectual exercises.

[aristeides]

Lincoln could have called the Congress into special session, something he quite deliberately neglected to do.

[stainlessbanner]

The Southern states seceded and then joined the Confederacy. The article does not apply here.

[GOPcapitalist]

since Lincoln was CIC in a case of open rebellion he had to act.

Arguably yes. The issue though is the extent of his authority to act and the Constitution indicates that one major action he claimed for himself, suspending habeas corpus, was outside of his authority.

If this was such a craven theft of Congress' powers,why didn't Congress act upon Taney's ruling?

Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus and Taney's ruling on that suspension occurred while Congress was out of session. The Constitution gives the president the power to call Congress into session, which would have been the proper course of action had Lincoln wanted habeas corpus suspended. He did not do so and instead acted on his own by asserting a power he did not constitutionally have.

I'm just saying that in a situation where if Maryland had seceeded, DC would have been surrounded by enemy territory, Lincoln did what he had to and Congress was grateful for his prompt action in those circumstances.

Even so, acting to address the situation in Maryland is NOT the same as suspending habeas corpus as a means to address that situation. The latter was the issue that came before Taney's court and Taney ruled appropriately on it. Lincoln could have easily addressed the situation in a constitutional way by either (a) calling Congress into session to suspend the writ, or (b) stating cause for arrest in the case of Merryman and the others. In fact when Merryman's petition was recieved by the court, Taney instructed his captors that they could state cause for his arrest and legally retain him in prison.

Which is why both the Executive and Legislative branches were all to happy to ignore Taney's ruling.

The legislative branch was out of session during the ruling and therefore could not weigh in until several months after it. The executive branch on the other hand, being the party that had committed the unconstitutional act, was bound by the processes of the judicial system, themselves set up under the Constitution, to either abide by the ruling or appeal it. Lincoln did neither, and accordingly violated the judicial system's constitutional authority in addition to the initial constitutional violation itself.