Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: 2ndDivisionVet
The comparison to the Emancipation Proclamation ignores historical fact. Here is a brief history from Wikipedia:

Lincoln issued the Proclamation under his authority as "Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy" under Article II, section 2 of the United States Constitution.[3] As such, he had the martial power to suspend civil law in those states which were in rebellion. He did not have Commander-in-Chief authority over the four slave-holding states that had not seceded: Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland and Delaware. The Emancipation Proclamation was never challenged in court. To ensure the abolition of slavery everywhere in the U.S., Lincoln pushed for passage of the Thirteenth Amendment. Congress passed it by the necessary 2/3 vote in February 1865 and it was ratified by the states by December 1865.[4]

Note that the Emancipation Proclamation was a war-time effort, and only applied to states that were in rebellion against the Union, and thus did not apply to all the slaveholding states.

As far as I know, there are currently no US states in open armed rebellion against the United States, and thus the President has no CIC justification to invoke.

7 posted on 07/31/2011 10:11:27 AM PDT by Maceman (Obama: As American as nasei goreng)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Maceman
"As far as I know, there are currently no US states in open armed rebellion against the United States, and thus the President has no CIC justification to invoke."

Yet

if we continue down this path.

12 posted on 07/31/2011 10:17:30 AM PDT by KC_Lion (If Sarah can't be elected in 2012, then Phase II will fall into place, may G-D have mercy on us all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson