In class this week we will discuss the role of habeas corpus in Civil War history and, throughout the remainder of the year, will see instances when the government is tempted to suspend (or even in rare cases ignore) the rights guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution. The argument for such an action is usually that it is easier to "get the job done" when the "red tape" has been removed. While we, as Christians, are biblically called upon to obey the laws of the land, it is important for the preservation of liberty that, as citizens, we are aware of our rights and that we hold our leaders accountable to the Constitution.
Decisions that are rendered by the U.S. Supreme Court are extremely important because it is almost impossible to undue the legal restrictions and precedents they establish. In the years following the Civil War, not only were there cities and homes to restore, but also a certain balance of power that needed to be corrected. Actions taken by the Lincoln administration in the time of war were feared to pose a real danger to individual liberty once the war was over. For this reason Congress and the Court, in their separate ways, attempted to reform American government.
In this week's assignment I'd like you to research a Supreme Court case entitled "Ex parte Milligan, 1866" (filed usually under Milligan, ex parte). Lambdin Milligan was undoubtedly a criminal, and something had to be done about his scheme, but the Court ruled (9-0, which is very rare) that the Lincoln administration had made a mistake. It will take some thought to sort out why the Court (led by Lincoln-appointed Salmon P. Chase) disagreed with Lincoln's handling of the situation.
Write an essay (200 word minimum) that explains what the dispute was about, and make a suggestion as to how the need of the government to provide for the safety of society can, in such situations, be balanced with the constitutional guarantees of individual liberty.
As you might have noticed, this is a topic that still matters today. For 10 bonus points on the next test, in addition to the homework assignment, write an essay (turn it in to me in class) that compares and contrasts the Milligan case with the case Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 2005.
Good luck and God bless! Don't forget to site your sources and to leave 150 words of comments on the work of others.
The Ex Parte Milligan (1866), is a court case which was between the court and a man, Lamdin Milligan, that was in the Union and livid in Indiana. This whole argument was the fact that Milligan was disobedient or even possibly tried to remove himself from the Union. Obviously, that was like unheard of to remove yourself or disobey the Union. For this crime that Milligan committed, the government had a say and a decision in what his punishment was and they ruled or sentenced him to be executed and be put to death (He was going to be hung.) Before his execution or the days before he was going to be put to death, he wrote that he should be able the right of “Habeas Corpus.” Or in other words he got to say what he believed to have a say in what he did. The court said that since he was an American citizen and he was from a non-rebellious state he was pretty much go free. At the end of the essay that I got my information they stated that this court case made us realize not to take or rights and freedoms for granted. I really liked that statement we do have a lot of freedoms and rights we get and we should be thankful for those.
ReplyDeleteworks cited:http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/antebellum/landmark_exparte.html
Ex parte Milligan, 1866
ReplyDeleteOn 5 October, 1864, Lamdin P. Milligan of the U.S. government has been arrested. He was charged with Conspiracy Against the Government of the United States; Affording aid and comfort to rebels against the authority of the United States; Inciting insurrection, disloyal practices, and violation of the laws of war.
Because Milligan was a U.S. citizen and citizen of the State of Indiana, he was put before a military court in Indiana and sued. He was sentenced to death by hanging and moved to a military prison.
Before his execution, Milligan asked for a Haebus corpus. This is a court order is a prisoner unjustly detained by the government to release. (Was The Court held that Lincoln had violated the Presedent Consitition by suspending the right of Habeas Corpus during the Civil.)
In his petition, he argued that the military tribunal had no jurisdiction to try him, because he was an American citizen living in a non-rebellious state. After the Civil War, the review of the petition was prompted by the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court ruled that Milligan be tried in a civilian court. The Court also pointed out that he was not connected to the armed forces and had not been fighting Union forces when he was captured.
The Court thus denied what Argued Milligan basic constitutional rights in being subjected to a military tribunal. These included the right to proceedings before a grand jury, and the right to be tried separately from court proceedings.
In 1866 in the court case called Ex Parte Milligan five men, in which ones name was Lambdin P Milligan, were charged in plotting to steal Union weapons and use them to attack an Union prisoner of war camp. Since they were in a middle of a war they were convicted without a trial and all five men were hanged immeaditely. After the war they decided to have a trial, not that it would do any good in my opinion… they had already been hung. Today I think our government would have taken the time to have a trial before killing the five men. In the end the court decided that the suspension of Haetus Corpus was lawful, so the governments actions were in line with that the constitution states. This was a huge deal because this set the pressident that the president had the power to suspend Haetus Corpus under certain situations, thus the president can convict people of crimes with out the right of a fair trial and jury. Six months after this circumstance Congress ratified this to law and then later it was taken out of law because many people believed it gave too much power to one person.
ReplyDeleteOn 5 October 1866 happened the Court case called Ex Parte Milligan. That's about 5 men-one of those is Lambdin P. Milligan. They were accused to of planning to steal Union weapons and invade Union prisoner-of-war camps. After this they fought against the Govenament of Indiana and free other camps of Confederate soldiers; they also decided to take over the state governments of Indiana, Ohio, and Michigan. Their case appened in 1864 but the court found guilty, and sentenced after the Civil War ended.Milligan asked for thehabeas corpus (a whit, or legal action, through which a prisoner can be released from unlawful detention) but the Court didn't accept it and six months later,on March 3, 1863, was declareted the Habeas Corpus Suspension Act. The Court decided that military tribunals could not try civilians in areas where civil courts were open. Milligan was detained in 1864, well after Congress formally suspended the writ. This event happened after the Civil was in a Rupubblican Congress and the Court was reluctant to any decision against the legitimacy of military courts.
ReplyDeleteMarta.
Bethany, you did really good job for your essay! But I read that it wasn't only Milligan that did that but other four too! But you put a lot of information in it and I like it!
ReplyDeleteKatherina (I'm sorry if I spell your name wrong), you did really good job! i really like your essay! It's well written and there are a lot of information in it! Good job girl! :)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe ex parte Milligan case:
ReplyDeleteThis case was against Milligan and four other people, they tried to steal Union weapons and free camps of confederation prisoners. But their plan failed and they got caught. After that, a military court decided to hang them, but not until May 1865. That date gave them the chance to speak in front of a normal civilian court. The court said that the government made a mistake and that no military judge could speak a judgment to a civilian who is not involved in any military service. The military only could held the people, but not judge them. So he and his companions got send free. These rules only count, when civil courts are still operating. Lincoln changed this law, but the congress ratified it six months later. This shows that the congress did not liked the idea very much, especially since the south was occupied and it was harder for the Union trials to judge the enemies with this law. Since that time this case plays an important role and protects the right of civilians against the military better. An interesting fact of this case is that the court judged 9 to 0 for Milligan.
Sources: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0071_0002_ZS.html
http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0833218.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Milligan
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteEx Parte Milligan 1866
ReplyDeleteThis court case involved the unjust arrest and trial of an Indiana man, Lamdin Milligan, who was charged with conspiring to overthrow the government and liberate prisoners of war. He was arrested at his home, was tried in a martial court, and was sentenced to hang by the neck until dead. He petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus only a few days before his scheduled death sentence and argued that the military had no right to hold him because he was an American citizen living in a state that was not in rebellion with the Union. He said that the laws gave him the right to be tried in a civilian court before a jury. The court gave him a fair trial and found his arrest to be completely unjust because he was not treated according to his rights as a citizen. He was set free. This case addresses two things which are important in our courts, the rights of American citizens and the way our government is supposed to try people in court. The only real reason that Milligan was released was because of his improper arrest and trail. If the government had handled this properly then this would have never happened in the first place.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/antebellum/landmark_exparte.html
In October 1864, a man by the name of Lamdin P. Millagin was taken into custody on the charges of cospiring against the Union. The American Government accused Milligan of being apart of the Order for American Knights, who liberated prisoners and stole munitions of war. Even though he was an American citizen, he was tried under a "military tribunal" and was convicted of all charges;his sentance was to be hanged for his crimes. But, before he could be hanged, he opted for a writ of habeas corpus. This pretty much is a document claiming that he was held unjustly by the government. The court ruled that teh tribunal had no jurisdiction over Milligan and that the Lincoln administration had made a mistiake.Milligan was set free. I beleive that this case really shows us how thankful we should be to have our rughts and freedoms.
ReplyDeleteThank you,
Rebecca
I'm going to start off with giving a little bit of background on the case... It all started when Milligan and a few others were accused of planning to steal Union weapons and invade prisoner or war camps. When the idea of this got out the men were charged and found guilty and were sentenced to be hung, but there execution date was set for a year later so that gave them a whole year to fight the case and voice their opinions. The small loop hole that was found in their favor was that military tribunals weren't aloud to try civilians on an open military base. In the end though with the Habeas Corpus Suspension Act the men were suspended and the issue hung in the balance for quite a while because the military jurisdiction had been so extremely limited. In my opinion I believe that what these men had planned to do was very wrong... and also a legit crime, I understand that the military's jurisdiction was limited but if they were sure and well aware of the plans to commit a crime I believe they should then have the grounds to punish according to their wishes... But that's just my opinion.
ReplyDeleteWorks Citied:
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Milligan#Background_of_the_case
Rebecca,
ReplyDeleteGreat job on your essay it was very informative and it made me wonder just how accurate my essay is but I did the best I could... But again great job!
Marta,
I really enjoyed your essay. It was very well layed out and informative!!!
Nathaniel,
I'm really confused now because in your essay you stated that the men were hung but I didn't gather that from anything I had read now I feel completely stupid and lost hahaha big shock there (: but anyways you did a really good job and informed me of stuff I clearly didn't know... Again great essay.
Bethany,
I always love your essays because you always seem to find a way to connect with the topic and make a heart felt report back. I couldn't agree more with where you said we shouldn't take our freedoms for granite (: But again great job!
Catelyn,
Your essay was very very in depth and clear and easy to understand... I appreciate that it gives me a better picture of the situation and allows me to fully comprehend and understand what I need to know... Great job!
Hello :D
ReplyDeleteThe Ex parte Milligan was a case that said that it is unconstitutional (not right) to apply military tribunals to citizens when civilian courts are operating. (Or at least that's what I understood)
It started when this guy named Milligan and othe people were accused of trying to steal some weapons from the union and invade some union prisioner camps. When the union find out they were found guilty and sentenced to a military court (which is not right because they were citizens) now everything is starting to make sense. :)
I don't think it was fair for them to be judged by the military tribunals and even though the habeas corpus help them at the beginning, later on the president Lincoln suspended the habeas corpus and they all were found guilty and murdered in a bloody and nasty way.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Milligan
Daniel González.
Jessika: Your essay was very nice even though we had pretty much the same information from wikipedia ;)
ReplyDeleteRebecca: I like your essay because it was easy to read and it was short but with full information.
Congratulations.
Marta: il tuo saggio era noioso e difficile da leggere, spero di chiudere tuo armadietto il Lunedi altre 10 volte.
Hahahahahaha non si creda, non ha letto il tuo saggio. (:
Good Job everybody <3
Daniel: Callate por favor! No es justo usar Google translate! Tienes que usar la segunda pernsona no la tercera! Avrai la mia piccola vendetta di armadietto. Sin embargo, aunque el ensayo es aburrido. ahahah (just kidding obviously!)
ReplyDeleteThe Ex parte Milligan case was disputed March 5, 1866 and decided on April 3, 1866. Ex parte Milligan was about Lambdin P. Milligan and four other group members who were tried and convicted by the military for planning to invade Union camps, releasing Confederate soldiers, and invading Indiana's, Ohio's, and Michigan's governments. The issue was that the military is only allowed to try and convict when there is no court system readily available. The law applied to this case was Habeas Corpus Suspension Act 1863. The court ruled that the military's tribunal was unconstitutional. If Milligan and his four other group members hadn't had their constitutional rights they would have been hung a year later. Individual rights need to be balanced with government safety because we need to be tried fairly. Ex parte Milligan was an important decision and is looked back on today for reference. The members of the Supreme Court at this time were: Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase and Associate Justices, James M. Wayne, Samuel Nelson, Robert C. Grier, Nathan Clifford, Noah H. Swayne, Samuel F. Miller, David Davis, and Steven J. Field.
ReplyDeleteWork Sited: Wikipedia.
Daniel: I liked your essay. It was very good!! The essay was very simple but very informative and people could learn a lot through your essay so very good!!
ReplyDeleteRebecca: As always your essay is short, sweet and simple. I love how your put little detail that I didn’t and it helps me realizes something whole lot better. You essays seem like that you put some thought and effort in it! Very Job!!
Lydia: Your essay was very good and it had a lot of detail. I loved hoe you listed everyone in the Supreme Court at the time! That was very informative but minor but it helped! Good Job!
Christian: You did very well on your essay and it seemed that it flowed very well and you had it in a nice format. Your essay was in good detail and you explained everything that happened very nicely!! Great Job!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete“In Ex parte Milligan (1866), the Supreme Court ruled that a prisoner's ability to challenge his or her detention could only be suspended for a brief and finite period of time, and only if the situation compelled it.”
ReplyDeleteMilligan was accused of trying to overthrow the government and “holding communication with the enemy.”
As an American Citizen, Milligan was tried and convicted, then sentenced to death by hanging. Soon before his hanging date, Milligan “petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus in a local federal court,” that meaning a court order of releasing a prisoner being held unjustly by the government. The Supreme Court agreed and ruled that he should have been tried in a federal civilian court.
The government’s mistake pretty much saved Milligan in the end. The jury unanimously voted in his favor while considering these facts: Milligan belonged to a non-rebellious state, He wasn’t connected to the armed forces, and he was denied his basic constitutional rights from the beginning.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/antebellum/landmark_exparte.html
Jessi, I enjoyed your essay. Yay.
ReplyDeleteI do have one slightly different thought, though.
You said, "but if they were sure and well aware of the plans to commit a crime I believe they should then have the grounds to punish according to their wishes".
Although I definitely understand the point you're making, I slightly disagree in that I, and I'm sure you wouldn't either, want to be held accountable for things I'm tempted with but don't necessarily follow through on or execute.
This situation is most definitely different. Those men were planning to do some pretty destructive junk. So yeah, they need the punishment. Maybe it's just the way you worded it that's throwing me off. I don't know.
Good job though.
Bethany,
ReplyDeleteFirst, Congratulations on being the first person to do the assignment instead of waiting until the last minute like me. : ) anyway, your essay, as always, was extremely well-written and to the point. It was very informative and even though we did the same assignment you mentioned things that I hadn’t even noticed. This assignment was a tiny bit harder than usual and you still did a fantastic job! Great essay!
Lydia,
Wow! Your essay was fantastic as well. I loved how you mentioned everyone on the Supreme Court at the time that really shows how you pay attention to detail. Like I told Bethany, as always your essays are really informative and unique in the sense that you put a large amount of difficult information into something we can all understand. Great Job! : )
Catelyn,
I enjoyed your essay because it was clear and informative. Great Job!
@ Catelyn A.
ReplyDeleteI really like your essay, it has a lot of interesting information about the persons and what happened. But I think you should use talk a little more why it is still important today and what the judge sad. Next time you probably should use more sources, because you never know who posted the information.
@ Jessi Lynne
I think you did a very good job with your essay, it is easy to understand, but you also have a lot of information about the case and the person. I also think it is good, that you used your own opinion.
@ Rebecca Dunmore
I like your essay too, it is very informative and also interesting, you have good information in it, especially the background information about him and his group. But next time you probably should mention your sources, since it is part of the assignment.
K. Sellmaier:
ReplyDeleteAs always, great job on your essay. It was full of detail and written so that anyone could understand.
nathaniel.shadoan:
Great job on your essay! Full of easy to read information.
Bethany:
As always, great job on your essay!
It was well researched and well written.
Jessi:
Awesome job. As always you paid attention to detail and wrote a good essay.
Lauren:
Great job. Your essay was full of useful information pertaining to the assignment.
Rebecca:
Great job as always! Your essays are always full of information and written well.
Marta:
Great job as always! Your essay was written well and full of information!
Catelyn:
Awesome job! As always you did a great job on your essay. It was researched and written well.
Christian S.:
Great job on your essay! As always it was written and researched well.
In 1864 a man by the name of Lamdin P. Milligan was arrested and charged with conspiracy against the u.s. government. He was charged with this because he had been plotting to take Weapons from the union and kill a Union prisoner. Two years later a court case which is now called Ex Parte Milligan was held. He was sentenced to be hung but filled for habeas corpus a few days before his execution. He suggested that the military could not execute him because Indiana was not against the Union. He felt that he should have the oppritunity to be tried ina civilian court before a jury. In the end he was not executed because it was not fair for his rights as a citizen. If the court would have initially given him a fair trial habeas corpus would have not been an issue at all.
ReplyDeleteBethany,
ReplyDeleteI always love your essays. Because you always talk about what you really feel in your heart. I could not agree more with you said that we shouldn't take our freedoms for granite. You did a really good job. I like it.
Catelyn,
Your essay was really easy to understand. It gives me a better picture of the situation and allows me to fully comprehend and understand what I need to know. I’m so glad I read yours. Great job!
Marta,
I really liked your essay. You did a really good job. I like it.
Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 2 (1866), was a United States Supreme Court case that ruled that the application of military tribunals to citizens when civilian courts are still operating is unconstitutional. Lambdin P. Milligan and four others were accused of planning to steal Union weapons and invade Union prisoner-of-war camps. And then they had arguments. First one is about the United States was delivered by Benjamin F. Butler, a Massachusetts lawyer and state legislator, and future Governor of Massachusetts. The second one was for the petitioner was delivered by Jeremiah S. Black, former United States Attorney General and Secretary of State, James A. Garfield, future President, and New York lawyer David Dudley Field. The Supreme Court decided that the suspension of habeas corpus was lawful, but military tribunals did not apply to citizens in states that had upheld the authority of the Constitution and where civilian courts were still operating. It observed further that during the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. And it is important to note the political environment of the decision.
ReplyDelete