1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
ValentinkaMS [17]
3 years ago
10

Help!!

History
1 answer:
Lena [83]3 years ago
7 0

Answer:

On May 28, 1861, Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger Taney directly challenged President Abraham Lincoln’s wartime suspension of the great writ of habeas corpus, in a national constitutional showdown.

roger_Brooke_Taney

Lincon and Taney had not been on good terms prior to Taney’s decision on the habeas question in Ex Parte Merryman, which he issued while acting as a circuit judge. Taney had also written the majority opinion in the controversial Dred Scott case in 1857, a decision than Lincoln publicly criticized in his famous debates with Stephen Douglas. Lincoln also made the Dred Scott decision a central theme of his 1860 presidential campaign.

As Chief Justice, Taney was forced to issue the presidential oath to Lincoln in March 1861, and to listen to Lincoln’s inaugural address, where he again criticized Taney and the Dred Scott decision, but not directly by name.

“The candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made in ordinary litigation between parties in personal actions the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their Government into the hands of that eminent tribunal,” Lincoln said.

About three months later, Taney had his chance to address Lincoln’s vision of executive power in Ex Parte Merryman.

Article 1, Section 9, of the Constitution states that “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.” The Great Writ’s origins go back to the signing of the Magna Carta in England in 1215 and the writ compels the government to show cause to a judge for the arrest or detention of a person.

After the start of the Civil War, President Lincoln ordered General Winfield Scott to suspend habeas corpus near railroad lines that connected Philadelphia to Washington, amid fears of a rebellion in Maryland that would endanger Washington.

On May 25, 1861, federal troops arrested a Maryland planter, John Merryman, on suspicion that he was involved in a conspiracy as part of an armed secessionist group. Merryman was detained at Fort McHenry without a warrant. Merryman’s attorney petitioned the U.S. Circuit Court for Maryland, which Taney oversaw, for his client’s release.

On May 26, Taney issued a writ of habeas corpus and ordered General George Cadwalader, Fort McHenry’s commander, to appear in the circuit courtroom along with Merryman and to explain his reasons for detaining Merryman.

Cadwalader didn’t comply with the writ and instead sent a letter back to Taney on May 27 explaining that Lincoln had authorized military officers to suspend the writ when they felt there were public safety concerns. Taney then tried to notify Cadwalader that he was in contempt of court, but soldiers at Fort McHenry refused the notice.

On May 28, Taney issued an oral opinion, which was followed by a written opinion a few days later. He stated that the Constitution clearly intended for Congress, and not the President, to have to power to suspend the writ during emergencies.

“The clause in the Constitution which authorizes the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is in the ninth section of the first article. This article is devoted to the Legislative Department of the United States, and has not the slightest reference to the Executive Department,” Taney argued. “I can see no ground whatever for supposing that the President in any emergency or in any state of things can authorize the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, or arrest a citizen except in aid of the judicial power,” Taney concluded.

However, Taney noted that he didn’t have the physical power to enforce the writ in this case because of the nature of the conflict at hand. “I have exercised all the power which the Constitution and laws confer on me, but that power has been resisted by a force too strong for me to overcome,” he said. But Taney did order that a copy of his opinion be sent directly to President Lincoln.

Lincoln didn’t respond directly or immediately to the Ex Parte Merryman decision. Instead, he waited until a July 4th address to confront Taney at a special session of Congress.

Explanation:

You might be interested in
How might this telegram anger the American government
Tema [17]
When the telegram was invented people were able to communicate to one another from far distances so... This could have angered the government since they couldn't control the citizens movements and actions
3 0
4 years ago
1. How did the end of WWI impact American society in the 1920s?
Gelneren [198K]

Answer:

1.  The end of WW1 in 1918 was a time of great social and economic transition that led directly to what amde the 1920s "The Roaring Twenties." Technological advancements, urbanizations and immigration led directly to the social upheavals of the 1920s.

2. The Harlem Renaissance was an intellectual, social, and artistic explosion centered in Harlem, Manhattan, New York City, spanning the 1920s. At the time, it was known as the "New Negro Movement", named after The New Negro, a 1925 anthology edited by Alain Locke.

3. Certain norms of Western middle-class femininity all but disappeared, and women's visible appearance before 1914 and after 1918 markedly differed – with many women having shorter hair and wearing shorter skirts or even trousers.

4. As stocks continued to fall during the early 1930s, businesses failed, and unemployment rose dramatically. By 1932, one of every four workers was unemployed. Banks failed and life savings were lost, leaving many Americans destitute. With no job and no savings, thousands of Americans lost their homes.

Explanation:

7 0
3 years ago
Why did the English think that it was reasonable to enforce the Stamp Act?
tino4ka555 [31]

Answer:

British Parliament passed the Stamp Act to help replenish their finances after the costly Seven Years' War with France. Part of the revenue from the Stamp Act would be used to maintain several regiments of British soldiers in North America to maintain peace between Native Americans and the colonists

Explanation:

8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
The final unification of Germany occurred in a way that created the most conflict with what country?
const2013 [10]

The final unification occurred in a way that created the most conflict in France because of the proclamations.

<h3>What was the final unification of Germany?</h3>

The unification happened in 1871 after the Franco-Prussian War and this lead to the German princes proclaiming the German nation in Versailles, France.

Hence, this unification occurred in a way that created the most conflict in France because of the proclamations.

Therefore, the Option D is correct.

Read more about final unification

<em>brainly.com/question/1168238</em>

#SPJ1

3 0
2 years ago
Which of the following best explains the Square Deal? It was a policy by William McKinley that stated the common man should get
Morgarella [4.7K]
<span>was President Theodore Roosevelt's domestic program formed upon three basic ideas: conservation of natural resources, control of corporations, and consumer protection. Thus, it aimed at helping middle class citizens and involved attacking plutocracy and bad trusts while at the same time protecting business from the most extreme demands of organized labor. In contrast to his predecessor William McKinley, Roosevelt was a Republican who believed in government action to mitigate social evils, and as president denounced "the representatives of predatory wealth" as guilty of "all forms of iniquity from the oppression of wage workers to defrauding the public."</span>
6 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Which is the proper hierarchy of leadership roles in the Senate from lowest to highest?
    13·1 answer
  • Which statement is an example of an effective claim for an argumentative essay?
    12·1 answer
  • Which statement best explains the existence of structures such as Roman baths and aqueducts in England?
    7·1 answer
  • To sell state-run firms to individuals is to
    6·1 answer
  • Help it was due Monday
    6·2 answers
  • An activist in 19th-century Italy is giving a speech. He claims that Italians all share a language and culture, but are divided
    6·1 answer
  • Who was are 3rd president? Without looking it up ! Giving out Brainliest
    8·2 answers
  • Select all the correct answers. What are two reasons that the Louislana Purchase caused a debate in the United States?
    8·1 answer
  • To what degree was communism a genuine threat to the interests and security of the United States in the early 1950s? Was the Ame
    8·1 answer
  • Explain the causes and effects of the development of political institutions from 1450 to 1648.
    10·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!