what are some illegal things Lincoln did as president?

Question

I heard someone mention how ole abe did a lot of illegal things as president during the civil war, i was curious as to what they were. Thanks!

Answer 1

In response to the main accusations against Lincoln:

1) Lincoln's emergency call up of troops in the crisis after Sumter was hardly "illegal". In addition, he did NOT wait for Congress to meet in December (their first scheduled session) to place his actions before them. He called a special emergency session to which he spoke on JULY 4. And Congress, at that time, gave its approval to the actions he had taken.

Frankly, I cannot imagine anyone seriously expecting the executive NOT to act in the face of the emergency of war (insurrection) but to wait MONTHS for Congress to meet and act. (Indeed, he would be liable to impeachment for NOT acting and keeping his oath to protect the Union and Constitution!)

2) Suspension of habeas corpus was NOT "breaking a law". As a matter of fact, the Constitution EXPLICITLY allows for this when confronted with an insurrection (precisely the circumstances Lincoln found himself in). ** What had never been worked through (since we'd never HAD this kind of crisis!) was WHO was authorized to suspend habeas corpus -- the President or Congress? Again, for him to act in an emergency (when Congress, which was not in session COULD not!) was not law-breaking.

**Article 1, sec 9 --"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."

Also, if you look at the actual CASES where Lincoln took these steps, you find that he was much more hesitant than his staff about such steps. He did, however, believe it absolutely necessary in some cases, and argued for it in his July 4 message to Congress with the famous words, "Are all the laws, but one, to go unexecuted, and the government itself go to pieces, lest that one be violated?"

The same sort of issues actually go for the whole array of accusations against Lincoln. It was NOT an issue of "breaking the law", but about determining what the limits of his Constitutional authority were and how they applied in this unprecedented situation. Many have since concluded that he, at least in some instances, went too far. But again, that doesn't mean he broke the law (and certainly not that he was criminally liable for attempting to carry out the duties of his office). And do keep in mind, in all this, that the issues are about the HOW of conducting war, not about the President acting to harm to Union or to benefit himself to the detriment of others.

3) As far as the taking/freeing of SLAVES --

Note that though Lincoln expressed sympathy with the slaves he actually COUNTERMANDED orders by military leaders declaring them free. He insisted that, Constitutionally, only the PRESIDENT might have the authority to free them.. and then only as Commander-in-Chief under "military necessity". The argument that the President had such authority in waging war had been made as far back as the 1830s by John Quincy Adams, and was held by several in Lincoln's own cabinet before he came round to that view himself.

(He actually worked on his OWN plan beginning late in 1861 to urge the loyal border states to emancipate their OWN slaves, for which he sought financial assistance from Congress. If that had succeeded, he wanted to expand it to the border Confederate states, like Virginia, and so to defuse the underlying cause of the war and make way for peace. Doesn't quite fit the anti-Lincoln caricature!)

In fact, the Emancipation Proclamation specifically appealed to his this authority ('war powers'). It is ALSO the reason why Lincoln ONLY declared slaves free in territories then in rebellion. When others asked him to expand it, he explained that this destroyed the only legal justification he had -- that this was a legitimate to use against those at WAR with (in rebellion against) the federal government.

Lincoln was actually quite meticulous in the legal formulation of the Proclamation, because he WANTED it to stand up against any legal challenge. (He fully expected it to be challenged before the Supreme Court, presided over by the same Roger Taney who authored the Dred Scott decision.) His caution here, together with all the other steps he was taking and would take later (esp. pushing the Thirteenth Amendment) to handle this issue LEGALLY, shows that, far from callously disregarding the law, he sought strong legal arguments for what he believed was NECESSARY to win this fight and preserve/restore the Union.

Here are the key parts of the Proclamation itself, so you can see his basic argument:

"Now, therefore I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, by virtue of the power in me vested as Commander-in-Chief, of the Army and Navy of the United States in time of actual armed rebellion against the authority and government of the United States, and as a fit and necessary war measure for suppressing said rebellion. . . .

"And upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of justice, warranted by the Constitution, upon military necessity, I invoke the considerate judgment of mankind, and the gracious favor of Almighty God."
http://www.nps.gov/ncro/anti/emancipation.html

Answer 2

The war was conducted for most of 1861 without Congressional approval. He finally got it in December. Before that,

He suspended Habeus Corpus, the right a person has to be charged with a crime before being held in jail after a certain period of time (usually 48 hours now).

He didn't specifically order it, but there were newspapers shut down and presses destroyed belonging to opposition editors.

Later in the war, two editors were arrested and jailed for starting a stock jobbing scheme, designed to cause a deflation of Union paper money, thus increasing the price of gold.

The business of not returning runaway slaves to their owners after they had crossed Union lines was a violation of the Fugitive Slave Act.

He did permit passage of cotton and other goods across Union lines to holders of licenses. This was discontinued later at the request of General Grant, since it was also jeopardizing the army in the west.

Ultimately, Habeus Corpus was suspended throughout the war years.

Answer 3

suspending habeus corpus was not illegal. it was needed in order to keep southern prisoners of war. if the north was to keep POW's without suspending habeus corpus, Lincoln would have to admit that the south was a different country

the emancipation proc was illegal? says who? you? you know nothing. don't answer these questions unless you are literate in the constitution

Answer 4

He suspended habeas corpus, a right guaranteed in the Constitution.

The Emancipation Proclamation was also illegal.

Answer 5

Here's a few:
He imposed martial law in Maryland, ordered troops against US citizens, created a state out of a state (West Virginia).