Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1581440
 
 

Footnotes (189)



 


 



Habeas Corpus, Due Process and the Suspension Clause: A Study in the Foundations of American Constitutionalism


Martin H. Redish


Northwestern University - School of Law

Colleen McNamara


Northwestern University - School of Law

March 30, 2010

Virginia Law Review, Vol. 96, No. 6, 2010
Northwestern Public Law Research Paper No. 10-11

Abstract:     
Ever since the attacks of September 11, 2001, constitutional scholars have been exploring the controversial issues surrounding the so-called “Emergency Constitution.” One of the very few provisions of the Constitution that explicitly contemplates such emergency situations is Article I, section 9, concerning the writ of habeas corpus. That provision prohibits suspension of the “Great Writ,” except “when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.”

The writ of habeas corpus has long stood as the primary weapon against the development of tyranny. It enables a court to demand that the executive produce individuals it is detaining and explain the lawful basis for that detention, and to order the detainees’ release if it finds the confinement to be unlawful. Absent the availability of habeas corpus, there would exist no legal means of preventing those in power from arresting any individual they want, for as long as they want, regardless of the legitimacy of the arrest. Yet pursuant to the so-called Suspension Clause, in times of rebellion or invasion the government is authorized to suspend the writ.

Highly respected scholars have recently engaged in an intense debate over the meaning and implications of the Suspension Clause. All of them, however, have seriously missed the mark, because all have assumed the continuing validity of that Clause. In this Article, we argue that the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment effectively repeals the Suspension Clause. We reach this conclusion for two reasons: first, the Suspension Clause indisputably authorizes summary detention without the availability of any form of hearing before a neutral adjudicator.

Whatever “due process” means at its outer fringes, there is no doubt that such a practice deprives an individual of liberty without due process of law. Yet the Due Process Clause, on its face, is unlimited in its application; it contemplates no exceptions, when an individual is to be deprived of life, liberty or property. Thus, purely as a matter of textual construction, the Due Process Clause, contained in an amendment, supersedes the Suspension Clause, which appears in the body of the Constitution. Moreover, it is important to recognize that the Suspension Clause authorizes tyrannical practices wholly inconsistent with and undermining of foundational precepts of American Constitutionalism. This concept dictates a governmental commitment to the rule of law and to limited governmental authority over its citizens. The Due Process Clause should be deemed to protect these core values. After establishing the supremacy of the Due Process Clause, the Article carefully explores the manner in which the Due Process Clause should be found to limit coercive governmental authority in times of national crisis.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 57

Keywords: Habeas Corpus, Due Process, Suspension Clause, Emergency Constitution, detention, Constitutional Law

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: April 5, 2010 ; Last revised: April 13, 2010

Suggested Citation

Redish, Martin H. and McNamara, Colleen, Habeas Corpus, Due Process and the Suspension Clause: A Study in the Foundations of American Constitutionalism (March 30, 2010). Virginia Law Review, Vol. 96, No. 6, 2010; Northwestern Public Law Research Paper No. 10-11. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1581440

Contact Information

Martin H. Redish (Contact Author)
Northwestern University - School of Law ( email )
375 E. Chicago Ave
Unit 1505
Chicago, IL 60611
United States
Colleen McNamara
Northwestern University - School of Law ( email )
375 E. Chicago Ave
Unit 1505
Chicago, IL 60611
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 875
Downloads: 165
Download Rank: 104,698
Footnotes:  189

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.641 seconds