During his interview with Stewart Rhodes last night, Bill O’Reilly strongly objected to Rhodes’s statement that bad weather is not a reason for suspending the Constitution. Rhodes referred to how the “authorities” went door to door disarming every last little old lady in New Orleans who was trying to protect herself in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
With his vintage bulging forehead vein, O’Reilly responded by speaking the two magic words that every neocon thinks will justify any act of tyranny the state could ever devise. These two words are “Abraham Lincoln.” “Abraham Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus!”, O’Reilly roared. (All together now, let’s sing: “Mine eyes have seen the glory of the . . . bla, bla, bla, bla, bla . . .”) This of course is supposed to end the debate. Case closed. Get lost Mr. Rhodes, you pinhead! O’Reilly wins another one!!
Yes, Lincoln did ILLEGALLY suspend Habeas Corpus, as the chief justice at the time, Roger B. Taney, explained in a court opinion. In response to Taney’s opinion, Lincoln issued an arrest warrant for the chief justice rather than appealing the opinion, which he could have done. He proceeded to imprison tens of thousands of Northern critics of his administration without any due process.
O’Reilly also screeched something about how the Supreme Court has also issued a “ruling” on the matter. Well, yes it did, Bill, but the ruling does not support your position. In 1866, after the threat of being imprisoned by King Lincoln was over, the U.S. Supreme Court said this in Ex Parte Milligan:
“The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and peace, and it covers with its shield of protection all classes of men, at all times and under all circumstances. No doctrine involving more pernicious consequences was ever invented by the wit of men that any of its great provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of Government” (emphasis added).
The court ruled that no one — neither the president nor Congress — could suspend Habeas Corpus as long as the civil courts were operating, which they were in the North for the duration of the war. In other words, the Supreme Court said that it is precisely in times of national emergencies (even including hurricanes, Bill O’Reilly) that civil liberties must be defended and protected most forcefully. If not, then governments will be given incentives to constantly create crises, or perceptions of crises, and declaring “official states of emergency” in order to grab more and more power and money and destroy more and more liberty and prosperity.
1:04 pm on February 20, 2010
