What is the legal context meaning of "Habeas Corpus" (not the Latin translation)?

Answer 1

It is a challenge to unlawful detainment. The most common applications are challenging a state court sentence in federal court.

However, it has recently become an issue because of the practice of holding detainees under federal custody, without charges and without a trial, which are 5th and 6th Amendment violations.

Habeas corpus allows a detainee to challenge their detention, and to request that the court order the govt to either charge or release the prisoners. This is sometimes considered part of the 1st Amendment right to petition for a redress of grievances.

According to the Constitution, habeas corpus shall only be suspend in times of invasion or rebellion when safety requires, basically meaning when the federal courts are unable to function because the streets are a warzone.

That is not the case in the US today. Federal courts are open for business. So, there is no valid legal reason to suspend habeas corpus. The only reason for doing so is to prevent the courts from hearing the claims of illegal detention and constitutional violations. In other words, so the govt can continue breaking the law.

Answer 2

A writ of habeas corpus essentially is an order, given by a judge, to an imprisoning institution, to bring a prisoner physically to the the court.

It means a judge sees/hears evidence/arguments, and decides that demonstrable proof may exist that a miscarriage of justice has occurred due to errors made during trial, and a person's imprisonment may be wrongful. Or, in a case where no charges have been filed, to determine if the prisoner is being illegally detained.

The judge then issues a 'writ' ordering that the prisoner be physically produced before the court.

The meaning of the term 'writ of habeas corpus' is a legally compelling order to an imprisoning institution to physically 'produce the prisoner,' to stand before the court who issues the order. The legal significance of this is because it means prisoners cannot just disappear into the bowels of a prison and never be seen or heard from again. People who ran afoul of the wrong high-powered person, back in the day, used to disappear a lot, and there was no recourse to get them out, or get their cases heard.

There are many, many websites which explain the meaning of habeas corpus, and the types of circumstances under which writs of habeas corpus can be issued. Do a Google search; you'll get a lot of material, explaining it in far greater detail than I have here.

Answer 3

In Common Law habeas corpus is the name of several writs which may be issued by a judge ordering a prisoner to be brought before the court. More commonly, the name refers to a specific writ known in full as habeas corpus ad subjiciendum, a prerogative writ ordering that a prisoner be brought to the court so it can be determined whether or not the prisoner is being imprisoned lawfully.

Answer 4

In common law, habeas corpus is the name of several writs which may be issued by a judge ordering a prisoner to be brought before the court. More commonly, the name refers to a specific writ known in full as habeas corpus ad subjiciendum, a prerogative writ ordering that a prisoner be brought to the court so it can be determined whether or not the prisoner is being imprisoned lawfully.

Answer 5

the writ of habeas corpus developed in English common law to protect the new rights of English people under the Magna Carta (1215 was the first step to dempcracy). The US Constitution of 1788 guarantees and protects the writ of habeas corpus in Article I, Section 9. All of the original thirteen states guranteed the writ in their original constitutions. Today, people who believe they are illegally being dtains can use the writ of habeas corpus to challenge their imprisonment.

Answer 6

United States

This procedure, part of English common law, was considered important enough to be specifically mentioned in the United States Constitution, which says, "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." (Article One, section nine).

In the USA, the writ of habeas corpus ad subjiciendum is a civil (as opposed to a criminal) proceeding in which the court inquires as to the legitimacy of a prisoner's custody. Typically, habeas corpus proceedings investigate whether a criminal trial was conducted fairly and constitutionally after the criminal appellate process has been exhausted. Habeas corpus is also used as a legal avenue to challenge other types of custody such as pretrial detention or detention by the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement pursuant to a deportation proceeding.

The "constitutional" writ of habeas corpus, which was originally understood to apply only to those held in custody by officials of the executive branch of the federal government, and not to those held by state governments, and then only within the jurisdiction of the court, should be distinguished from what can be called "statutory" habeas corpus. Congress granted all federal courts jurisdiction under Title 28, Section 2241 of the United States Code to issue writs of habeas corpus to release prisoners held by any government entity (state or federal) from custody, but only when held in violation of the Constitution. Title 28 U.S.C., section 2254, is the primary habeas corpus vehicle to challenge the constitutionality of a state court conviction. A similar provision, 28 U.S.C., section 2255, (though technically not a habeas corpus statute) provides analogous relief to federal prisoners.

Sections 2254 and 2255 govern the grant of habeas corpus relief by the federal courts after a prisoner is convicted and his direct appeals (in either state or federal court, depending on which jurisdiction has convicted the prisoner) have been completed. Prisoners who have been convicted in state courts also have access to habeas corpus actions under state law and can pursue such relief in addition to federal habeas corpus.

Decisions by the Warren Supreme Court greatly expanded the use and scope of the federal writ in the 1950s and 1960s. Over the last thirty years, decisions by the Burger and Rehnquist Courts have somewhat narrowed the writ. The Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 further limited the use of the federal writ by, among other things, imposing a one-year deadline (statute of limitation) and dramatically increasing the federal judiciary's deference to decisions previously made in state court proceedings either on appeal or in a state court habeas corpus action.

Answer 7

1. One of a variety of writs that may be issued to bring a party before a court or judge, having as its function the release of the party from unlawful restraint.
2. The right of a citizen to obtain such a writ.