Why do they NEED to cite precedence? Either they have the Constitutionally delegated power or they don't. Approving his actions after the fact is ex post facto legislation.
President Lincoln went through a mine field of military, legal and political problems and he rightly is regarded as a great president and great man.
No, and no again. He had no problems - he ignored the decisions of the courts, shut down all dissident newspapers, had tens of thousands of American citizens incarcerated at will, and held without trial, he prevented several state legislatures from meeting for fear that they were planning to secede, he had censored all battlefield media reports, and with the absence of Southern representatives, had his way almost at will in the Federal Legislature.
The following legislative acts occurring under the terms of Lincoln and the radical Republicans (1861-1877) have been struck down in whole or part:
Act of 25 Feb 1862 (12 Stat. 345, Sec. 1)
Act of 11 Jul 1862 (12 Stat. 532, Sec. 1)
Act of 20 May 1862 (12 Stat. 394, Sec. 35)
Act of 21 May 1862 (12 Stat. 407)
Act of 3 Mar 1863 (12 Stat. 711, Sec. 3)
Act of 3 Mar 1863 (12 Stat. 756, Sec. 5)
Act of 25 Jun 1864 (13 Stat. 187)
Act of 30 Jun 1864 (13 Stat. 311, Sec. 13)
Act of 24 Jan 1865 (13 Stat. 424) (requirement of test oath disavowing hostile actions to the United States)
Act of 23 Jul 1866 (14 Stat. 216)
Act of 2 Mar 1867 (14 Stat. 539)
Act of 31 May 1870 (16 Stat. 140, Sec. 3, 4)
Act of 31 May 1870 (16 Stat. 144)
Act of 17 Jun 1870 (16 Stat. 154, Sec. 3)
Act of 8 Jul 1870 (16 Stat. 210)
Act of 12 Jul 1870 (16 Stat. 235)
Act of 31 May 1870 (16 Stat. 141, Sec. 4)
Act of 20 Apr 1871 (17 Stat. 13, Sec. 2)
Act of 22 Jun 1874 (18 Stat. 2, Sec. 281, 282, 294, 304) Struck down sections of law requiring racial separation in schools of the District of Columbia.
Act of 22 Jun 1874 (18 Stat. 1878, Sec. 4)
Act of 1 Mar 1875 (18 Stat. 336, Sec. Sec. 1, 2)
Act of 3 Mar 1875 (18 Stat. 479, Sec. 2)
Act of 12 Jul 1876 (19 Stat. 80, Sec. 6, in part)
Act of 14 Aug 1876 (19 Stat. 141)
24 federal laws overturned in whole or part 1862-1876. To give you some comparision, only 3 were overturned from 1789-1860.
It was only after his death that the mythmakers have made Lincoln a great man. He barely won re-election in 1864 (and even that is contested: In Hapgood's Life of Lincoln 'Charles A. Dana testifies that the whole power of the War Department was used to secure Lincoln's re-election in 1864'). The majortity of the citizens of the united States voted for someone other than Lincoln. Richard Dana, wrote on 23 Feb 1863:
'I see no hope but in the army; the lack of repect for the President in all parties is unconcealed. He has no admirers.'Dana, in a letter to C. F. Adams, Sr., wrote again that Lincoln was 'an unspeakable calamity to us [Republicans]' in Mar 1863.
Lincoln & the Radical Republicans were the harbinger & author of the federal leviathan we have today:
'[T]he nature of federal-state relations changed fundamentally after the Civil War. That conflict produced in its wake a tremendous expansion in the scope of the Federal Government's lawmaking authority, so much so that the persons who helped to found the Republic would scarcely have recognized the many added roles the National Government assumed for itself.'
Justice White, [dissenting opinion] New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992)
Distorted and plain wrong.
You are a excuse maker for the slave power:
No, I posted what God says about slavery in the Bible. Joseph was a slave, servant of Potiphar and the Pharoh, was elevated to the 2nd highest position in the land, and witnessed to millions from his status as slave. It's an interesting book. You should read it sometime.
153 posted on 03/07/2003 9:35 AM EST by 4ConservativeJustices
You can be dismissed on that basis.
Walt