Talk:Ex parte Merryman
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I amended the summary by excerpting directly from the case (quoted sections in bold):
"Held, that the petitioner was entitled to be set at liberty and discharged immediately from confinement, upon the grounds following: 1. That the president, under the constitution of the United States, cannot suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, nor authorize a military officer to do it. 2. That a military officer has no right to arrest and detain a person not subject to the rules and articles of war, for an offence against the law of the United States, except in aid of the judicial authority, and subject to its control; and if the party be arrested by the military, it is the duty of the officer to deliver him over immediately to the civil authority, to be dealt with according to law. [Approved in Re Kemp, 16 Wis. 367.]"
This quotation replaced notations that only Congress was authorized to suspend Habeas Corpus, as this is implied by the prohibition on the executive branch and can otherwise be explained in the main description of the case. It also replaced the note that this holding applied even in times of war or other emergencies. This context is somewhat implied by the time and circumstances noted in the summary and in any event are not necessary qualification for applying the holding.
If this holding only applied in times of war or emergency, then the wartime/emergency context would of necessity be included in the summary.
The purpose of my edit was to provide the all-important holdings/rules of law up front. Given the relevance of this case in the contemporary legal challenges to the Bush administration's use of military tribunals, the actual language of the case is all the more important.
[edit] Relative of Merryman
A "Joseph P. Merryman" served as the Baltimore City rep to the Constitutional Convention of 1867 when the pro-slavery croud came back into political power. Anyone know if a relative to this John Merryman? --Noitall 05:28, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
Joseph P Merryman was a distant relation to John Merryman. Joseph P Merryman was the son of George Merryman (1811-1885) and Elizabeth E H Austin. The Grandson of Joseph Merryman(1760-1829)and Eleanor Gorsuch of Clover Hill in Baltimore County. He was the great grandson of Joseph Merryman (1726-1799)of Clover Hill. Joseph Merryman (1726-1799) was the youngest son of John Merryman and Martha Bowen of Clover Hill (Clover Hill was a tract of land known as Merryman's Lot, the tract was granted to Charles Merryman the father of John in 1682. The name Clover Hill was given in 1714 and the estate now stands on the corner of university parkway and charles street in baltimore city. The present house was built in 1778/9 by Joseph Merryman(1726-1799) and his son Joseph (1760-1829). The property passed out of the Merryman family in 1869 and is now the home to the Episcopal Bishop of Baltimore.)John Merryman and Martha Bowen eldest son was John Merryman (1703-1774), John had a son John and a daughter Elizabeth. John Merryman the son had a son named Nicholas Merryman of Hereford farm who was the father of John Merryman of Hayfields from ex parte Merryman. Elizabeth Merryman maried John Gorsuch and had a daughter Eleanor Gorsuch (1774-1858) who married Joseph Merryman (1760-1829) of Clover Hill. Joseph P. Merryman (1840-1924/9) was related to John Merryman of Hayfields through both his grandfather and grandmother. Hayfields has since been sold out of the Merryman family and today decendants of John Merryman of Hayfields live on a farm called "Clover Hill".
[edit] NPOV
This article seems to take a very Lincoln-apologist stance on his suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. Perhaps conflicting historical views need be involved? --68.52.68.18 04:26, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Heck, I'd say exactly the opposite. The article is filled with all sorts of indignation supporting Taney over Lincoln, so I added a neutrality tag to it. 67.188.29.176 05:45, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
There may be an answer on Wikipedia, at Hamdi v. Rumsfeld under the subsection entitled, "The Court's Opinion" and under the subsection entitled, "Effect on non-citizen detainees". The text refers to Justice O'Conner, who wrote a plurality opinion reflecting her opinion and that from Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices Breyer and Kennedy. To summarize: Justice O'Conner refered to "...the three-prong test of legal principals in Mathews v. Eldridge", limiting the applicable due process. The Wikipedia page also says that her wording included reference to an "alleged enemy combatant" saying this came from The Geneva Convention and included reference to the "... Court's holding in the case of Rasul v. Bush... " which was delivered the same day. The page implies that the plurality opinion agreed with the government's actions provided they were permitted a hearing to determine their status as an illegal enemy combatant.
This page: "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR_190-8" refers to AR 190-8 which also addresses much of the law pertaining to this. The page ends saying the detainess were released on June 4, 2007 on the premise that there had been no determination of whether or not Omar Khadr and Salim Ahmed Hamdan were illegal enemy combatants as opposed simply to being enemy combatants. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.33.225.3 (talk) 03:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Broken Links
I don't know if people check up on these things, but the links to the Poole and Rehnquist books both lead to dead ends.
140.247.175.126 06:22, 4 May 2006 (UTC)Drazba
Ok found one for merryman
