English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

7 answers

I don't think the Bill of Rights does get suspended during wartime. Those rights are considered fundamental, God given rights. I wonder if maybe you're think about habeas corpus, which can be suspended when martial law is declared.

"The basic premise behind habeas corpus is that you cannot be held against your will without just cause. To put it another way, you cannot be jailed if there are no charges against you. If you are being held, and you demand it, the courts must issue a writ or habeas corpus, which forces those holding you to answer as to why. If there is no good or compelling reason, the court must set you free. It is important to note that of all the civil liberties we take for granted today as a part of the Bill of Rights, the importance of habeas corpus is illustrated by the fact that it was the sole liberty thought important enough to be included in the original text of the Constitution."

Now GW's September 18, 2001 Presidential Military Order has been challenged by legal and constitutional scholars as being in violation of habeas corpus and the Bill of Rights, articles 4,5,6, & 8. Legally, though, I don't think the Bill of Rights can be suspended.

2006-09-16 09:22:10 · answer #1 · answered by BethS 6 · 0 1

The Bill of Rights are not suspended during time of war. President Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus during the Civil War. A writ of habeas corpus is a judicial mandate to a prison official ordering that an inmate be brought to the court so it can be determined whether or not that person is imprisoned lawfully and whether or not he should be released from custody.

Lincoln suspended habeas corpus because he felt that the State Courts in the northwest would not convict war protesters, whose activities he considered detrimental to the organization of the war effort. He proclaimed that all persons who discouraged enlistments or engaged in disloyal practices would come under Martial Law and would be tried by military tribunals.

This was a very controversial position and its propriety is debated to this day. The Supreme Court restored habeas corpus in Ex Parte Milligan (1866). See http://www.civil-liberties.com/pages/exparte_milligan.htm

2006-09-16 16:37:39 · answer #2 · answered by joeb 2 · 0 1

Much to the chagrin of George Bush, the Bill of Rights is NOT automatically suspended during times of war.

2006-09-16 15:24:28 · answer #3 · answered by Mr. G 6 · 2 1

lol. I just pictured Bush answering this question and getting all the words mispronounced.

CORRECTION!!! Bill of wrongs- while Bush is in office.

2006-09-16 15:31:42 · answer #4 · answered by Tesra 3 · 1 0

They AREN'T. At least they never have been until President Bush and his "ilk" got into the White House.

They are using the "War on Terror" to erode our Freedoms. Bush even said in public and ON CAMERA that we "had too many Freedoms."

Scary.

2006-09-16 15:25:19 · answer #5 · answered by AdamKadmon 7 · 1 1

because of the elastic clause in the constitution...it's "necessary and proper" and it goes along with martial law

2006-09-16 15:48:20 · answer #6 · answered by LOLA 1 · 0 2

WELL NOT FULLY PERHAPS DUE TO THE GENEVA CONVENTION

2006-09-16 15:24:56 · answer #7 · answered by Penney S 6 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers