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

To: davidjquackenbush
I really don't understand why you expect me to accept that suppressing a rebellion is the constitutional equivalent of waging war. Please develop your point a bit, so I can see if I am missing something.

If a war be made by invasion of a foreign nation, the President is not only authorized but bound to resist force by force. He does not initiate the war, but is bound to accept the challenge without waiting for any special legislative authority. And whether the hostile party be a foreign invader or States organized in rebellion, it is nonetheless a war although the declaration of it be "unilateral."
Justice Grier, Prize Cases, 67 U.S. 635 (1862)

The Supreme Court held that it was a "war".  Also Lincoln himself stated that his actions were unconstitutional:

"I felt that measures, otherwise unconstitutional, might become lawful, by becoming indispensable to the preservation of the constitution, through the preservation of the nation."
Abraham Lincoln, "To Albert G. Hodges",  4 Apr 1864, Collected Works Of Abraham Lincoln, (Roy P. Basler, Ed.), Vol VII, p. 281.


187 posted on 05/08/2002 3:07:48 PM PDT by 4CJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies ]


To: 4ConservativeJustices
Please note, he says "otherwise unconstitutional." What do you think he means by "otherwise"?
188 posted on 05/08/2002 3:45:00 PM PDT by davidjquackenbush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | 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