[Timber Rattler]

Big difference...Lincoln had an honest-to-goodness shooting Civil War on his hands, in which the Union was very much in danger of losing. And his war measures all sunsetted in 1865 and 1866.

Obama, on the other hand, is turning the country into a socialist totalitarian state.

[Pikachu_Dad]

I think this was intended to be a Presidential power. Invasions and Rebellions happen quickly. To expect a voting body, which may not be in session, to act is ridiculous. Only an executive body can act quickly enough fr these two causes.

“Clause 2. The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”

[Pikachu_Dad]

as for Supreme Court Judge Taney, it was his wrongful act in the Dred Scott case that helped lead to the Civil War.

“1782 Including a finding by Chief Justice Taney on circuit that the President’s action was invalid. Ex parte Merryman, 17 Fed. Cas. 144 (No. 9487) (C.C.D. Md. 1861).”

[i_robot73]

Lincoln had neither a rebellion nor a civil war; there was no battle to overtake D.C.. It was a war of secession/self-governance and autonomy.

IMHO, the article too is correct about the delegation of power. It belongs with Congress, along with the other Legislative powers in the Article.

Lincoln should have been slapped hard for the power grab, let alone Sherman’s march to the sea/Atlanta. But, to the victor goes the writing of history.

[lentulusgracchus]

Lincoln had an honest-to-goodness shooting Civil War on his hands, .... Obama, on the other hand, is turning the country into a socialist totalitarian state.

Give Barky a break. He's doing his best to start a war, okay? Give him some credit.

Do I really need the </s>?