How did Lincoln treat the civil rights of dissenters during the Civil War?

Question

A) He made arbitrary arrests for purely political reasons.
B) He suspended the writ of habeas corpus in critical areas and applied martial law freely.
C) He prohibited any free elections during the war.
D) He did everything in his power to preserve their rights because he was devoted to individual freedom.

Answer 1

None of the above if this is an assignment, your instructor needs to be better informed.

He did suspend habeas corpus and other civil rights in some cases. Martial law was used sparingly, and not always with his approval.

He set dangerous precedents that are today being amplified beyond human understanding, but he did it to preserve the Union, not to preserve profits.

He also was facing an enemy that was active in every major northern city, and here out west as well as just across the river from the streets of Washington.

Answer 2

Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus but part of the country was clearly in a state of rebellion as specified in Article I, section 9 of the Constitution. Lincoln first suspended habeas corpus in Maryland, two weeks after the attack on Fort Sumter. There is little question that Lincoln had the authority to impose martial law pursuant to the Militia Acts. Maryland was a crucial border state where some had tried to prevent the movement of Union troops through Baltimore, a critical rail juncture.

The issue in contention was whether the president could suspend the writ of habeas corpus as opposed to Congress. The infamous Chief Justice Taney, author of the Dred Scott decision, said that the president could not, in Ex Parte Merryman. Merryman had been suspected of being involved in the burning of bridges and the destruction of telegraph lines near Baltimore. Note that in the South, the Confederacy also suspended habeas corpus and instituted martial law.

Congress implicitly endorsed Lincoln’s actions through the August 1861 Ratification Act, and then explicitly endorsed Lincoln’s actions through the Habeas Corpus Act in March 1863.

Also note that, more recently, the Bush administration has tried to avoid the habeas corpus debate by simply declaring individuals to be “enemy combatants” thereby putting them outside of the control of the federal courts. The Military Commissions Act of 2006 later vaguely defined individuals as “unlawful enemy combatants.” It’s extremely confusing as evidenced by the decisions of the courts and the military tribunals.

Answer 3

b.
The actual right of habeas corpus is not stated anywhere in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. The authors of these documents apparently believed that habeas corpus was such a fundamental liberty that it needed no further guarantee in writing. The only mention of the writ of habeas corpus in the Constitution relates to when it can be taken away from judges. In a section limiting the powers of Congress (Art. I, Sec. 9), the Constitution states: "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in causes of rebellion or invasion of the public safety may require it."

This suspension clause was never activated through the terms of the first 15 presidents. Then during the Civil War, President Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus without consulting Congress. In doing so, Lincoln enabled the military to arrest and imprison thousands of civilians, including Clement L. Vallandigham.

Answer 4

B

Lincoln violated the United States Constitution by suspending the writ of habeas corpus.
~

Answer 5

B

(actually that was Stanton's idea)

Pax--------------------