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

Skip to comments.

The WH says Trump is considering suspending habeas corpus. What would that mean?
ABC News ^ | May 9, 2025 | Kelsey Walsh, Peter Charalambous, and Steven Portnoy

Posted on 05/10/2025 1:36:02 AM PDT by fluorescence

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141 next last
To: Cronos

Can the migrants stay with you? Just take a few ok?


21 posted on 05/10/2025 2:54:19 AM PDT by toddausauras (47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: woodpusher; Right_Wing_Madman; BroJoeK; exnavy; mrmeyer; neverevergiveup

President Trump has been preparing a path to argue for suspending habeas corpus.

First, and most importantly, right out of the gate President Trump issued an executive order declaring mass illegal immigration was an ‘invasion.’ Invasion is one of only two constitutional grounds for suspending the writ.

Second, Trump has invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 —the Act at the heart of these key cases— which invokes precedent for wartime-style legal authority over foreign nationals, bypassing peacetime due process protections.

Third, and maybe most importantly, everything we can see is barreling toward galvanized public support for suspending the writ. Trump and his allies have consistently described the crisis as unlawful judges defying the will of the people —just as in Lincoln’s day— and interfering with the President’s electoral mandate to remove foreign terrorists and cartel gangs from American shores.

And the Supreme Court has always deferred to the other branches over things like declarations of emergency, war, or invasions, calling those political questions rather than legal issues.


22 posted on 05/10/2025 2:57:29 AM PDT by Jacquerie (ArticleVBlog.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: fluorescence

Suspension is a Congressional privilege.


23 posted on 05/10/2025 3:00:14 AM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: woodpusher

seriously?

Maduro sends in tens of thousands of gangbangers, other nations pump in terrorists of all islamic stripes and it’s NOT an “invasion”?

Public safety DOES require a declaration of an invasion AND Habeas Corpus declaration by the president at this point as the judiciary has failed its role to enforce the Constitution’s Article II mandates by subverting them. There is no other choice at this point.


24 posted on 05/10/2025 3:07:59 AM PDT by normbal (normbal. somewhere in socialist occupied America, MAGA/MAHA rising.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: fluorescence

Miller’s talk of suspending habeas corpus sounds less like a real plan and more like a shot across the judiciary’s bow—taunting/trolling lower courts and warning the Supreme Court to back the executive on immigration or risk a constitutional showdown.


25 posted on 05/10/2025 3:26:40 AM PDT by RoosterRedux ("There's nothing so inert as a closed mind" )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sam_whiskey

Congress has too many RINO cowards to make it happen which only asserts my long held claim that there are no more political solutions.


26 posted on 05/10/2025 3:28:38 AM PDT by MachIV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

Just ask the J6 defendants


27 posted on 05/10/2025 3:31:10 AM PDT by daku
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: fluorescence

“significantly curtailing a right enshrined in the Constitution.”

…suddenly, out of nowhere and conveniently the constitition has meaning?!


28 posted on 05/10/2025 3:33:51 AM PDT by albie (U)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: woodpusher

There is no rebellion or invasion, and the public safety does not require it.

........

I disagree

There are riots and rebellions nationally and people are murdered by invaders every single day.


29 posted on 05/10/2025 3:36:09 AM PDT by Chickensoup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: fluorescence

LOL

No, it will not be suspended.


30 posted on 05/10/2025 3:40:22 AM PDT by Fury
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fluorescence; All

If people broke the law getting here, they can’t also demand protection IN the law 😡


31 posted on 05/10/2025 3:44:30 AM PDT by SMARTY (In politics, stupidity is not a handicap. Napoleon Bonaparte I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fluorescence

Common Interpretation

https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/articles/article-i/clauses/763

by Amy Barrett

Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit; Professor of Law at the University of Notre Dame Law School

by Neal K. Katyal
Paul and Patricia Saunders Professor of National Security Law at Georgetown University Law Center; Partner at Hogan Lovells

The Suspension Clause protects liberty by protecting the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. It provides that the federal government may not suspend this privilege except in extraordinary circumstances: when a rebellion or invasion occurs and the public safety requires it.

Appreciating the significance of this restraint first requires understanding the writ of habeas corpus. This writ, which Americans imported into the Constitution from English common law, is a means by which a prisoner can test the legality of her detention. A person who believes she is being imprisoned illegally can file a petition asking a judge to issue a writ of habeas corpus. When a prisoner files a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, her custodian must explain why the restraint is lawful. If the explanation does not satisfy the court, it will order the custodian to release her. The writ is thus a crucial means by which a prisoner can obtain freedom.

Today, the writ of habeas corpus is primarily used by those serving prison sentences to challenge the legality of the process that resulted in their conviction. Historically, however, the writ was primarily used by those imprisoned without judicial process. Early Americans were keenly aware that monarchs of England had sometimes jailed people indefinitely without charging or trying them in court. Although the writ of habeas corpus existed, the king often ignored it. To protect against such abuse, Parliament enacted the Habeas Corpus Act of 1679 to ensure that the king released prisoners when the law did not justify confining them. This “Great Writ” guaranteed prisoners held on authority of the crown the right to invoke the protection of the judicial process.

The founding generation valued the Great Writ because they had this history in mind. Yet those who framed and ratified the Constitution also believed that in times of crisis, the executive might need leeway to hold suspects without answering to a court. Parliament had suspended the writ during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries when it concluded that the king needed expanded detention power to contain threats. Similarly, several states had equipped their governors with emergency power by suspending the writ during the Revolutionary War. Pre-ratification practice thus embraced both the importance of the writ and the need for a safety valve.

The Suspension Clause follows in this tradition. It protects the writ by imposing a general bar on its suspension. At the same time, it makes an exception for cases when an invasion or rebellion endangers the public safety. A suspension is temporary, but the power it confers is extraordinary. When a suspension is in effect, the president, typically acting through subordinates, can imprison people indefinitely without any judicial check.

The Clause does not specify which branch of government has the authority to suspend the privilege of the writ, but most agree that only Congress can do it. President Abraham Lincoln provoked controversy by suspending the privilege of his own accord during the Civil War, but Congress largely extinguished challenges to his authority by enacting a statute permitting suspension. On every other occasion, the executive has proceeded only after first securing congressional authorization. The writ of habeas corpus has been suspended four times since the Constitution was ratified: throughout the entire country during the Civil War; in eleven South Carolina counties overrun by the Ku Klux Klan during Reconstruction; in two provinces of the Philippines during a 1905 insurrection; and in Hawaii after the bombing of Pearl Harbor.


32 posted on 05/10/2025 3:46:05 AM PDT by tired&retired (Blessings )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: woodpusher
Tesla attacks and burning.

Colleges resembling skirmish lines.

Women afraid to take a jog.

Over 100k poisoned and killed by cartels.

Hundreds of thousands of kids trafficked.

Go back to sleep.

33 posted on 05/10/2025 3:46:53 AM PDT by Kudsman (Hey Democrat, leave them kids alone!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: woodpusher

“...There is no rebellion or invasion...”

There IS!


34 posted on 05/10/2025 3:48:29 AM PDT by SMARTY (In politics, stupidity is not a handicap. Napoleon Bonaparte I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: woodpusher

Sorry, the arrival of millions of military age male illegal aliens *is* an invasion. One that was aided by the Democrats.

Enemies foreign and domestic indeed.


35 posted on 05/10/2025 3:50:14 AM PDT by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie

Does Congress need to approve this if President Trump moves to suspend?


36 posted on 05/10/2025 4:05:00 AM PDT by TermLimits4All ("If you stand for nothing, you'll fall for anything.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: fluorescence

Let say, US is being invaded by China.

Are we going to ask Judge Boasberg each time before we shoot?


37 posted on 05/10/2025 4:22:34 AM PDT by AZJeep (sane )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: woodpusher
There is no rebellion or invasion, and the public safety does not require it.

You've been offered rebuttal at least half a dozen times so far to your absurd claim of no invasion.

We are all waiting breathlessly for you to defend your position.
38 posted on 05/10/2025 4:26:16 AM PDT by Dan in Wichita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: fluorescence

Let’s face it...

We have a Chief Justice who just is NOT up to the task.

He is a P. T. Barnum judge, not a Republican or Democrat judge, but one who enjoys the attention.

That’s how I see it.

God help us.


39 posted on 05/10/2025 4:32:09 AM PDT by Maris Crane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newfreep

There definitely would be endless lawfare by the Demonrats. Civil war era southerners and northerners had more in common than today’s Marxist leftards and normals.


40 posted on 05/10/2025 4:32:13 AM PDT by AbolishCSEU (Amount of "child" support paid is inversely proportionate to mother's actual parenting of children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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