Lincoln's key measure was the suspension of
habeas corpus in September 1862. He wanted to be able to arrest and indefinitely detain individuals suspected of supporting the South.
How is that any different than Ashcroft's desire to arrest and indefinitely detain suspected "terrorists"? It's a de facto suspension of habeas corpus, is it not?
Consider where Padilla came from. Where he had been. His past. It's not like Ahscroft is going to arrest the cast of SNL.
Now you're catching on. Did the Federal government continue this practice after the War? No. Would the citizenry have tolerated such a practice? No. Would the government have been wrong to do so? Yes.
Ditto the rationing in WW2.
Those spreading panic about "Civil Rights" in the current war situation, I'm glad they weren't around in the 40s in any significant number: we all might be marching to the Third Reich if they were successful.