Civil Liberties, Habeas Corpus, and the War on Terror Essay - 1

Civil Liberties, Habeas Corpus, and the War on Terror - Essay Example In addition, the paper examines the habeas corpus in relation to the war against terrorism and the Supreme Court’s involvement, the involvement of the President and Congress in decisions regarding habeas corpus. Civil Liberties, Habeas Corpus, and the War on Terror Following the September 11th attack, the US, then under the Bush Administration, viewed the act as an initiator to a war against the country. In addition, successive terror attacks in Bali, Madrid train attack and the London subway attack, the Bush Government saw enough proof that terrorism was escalating (Cole, 2003). The Government did not take these activities lightly as this saw immediate measures from it and allies against terror activities. Among this stern measures included military intervention into Afghanistan, capture, persecution, and in worst cases, the elimination of potential suspects in the terror activities. In addition, the War on Terror implemented methods such as detention centers for extra-judici al prisoners like Guantanamo Bay, rendition flights and new interrogation techniques among many others. Nature of the Writ Historically, the role of habeas corpus was to protect those arrested by the Executive without the involvement of any judicial activities. ... public Safety may require it.† Strange enough, this is the only statement about the Great Writ found in the US constitution as opposed to the high regard in which it was held during its inception. It has been established that it is only the Federal Government that is limited to the writ and not the State. Attention has arose as to who should be given the authority to suspend the writ or rather determine the case in which suspension of the writ would be most appropriate. Initially, the power of suspending the law rested with the legislature but in early commentary, the power of the Congress to suspend the law assumed and stated by the Court. In early Civil War period, the privilege law was suspended by President Lincoln on his own motion only to be met with much resistance forcing him to seek for authorization from the Congress. Presidents, in times of wars and emergencies, have extraordinary authority accompanied with possession of executive powers that result in asserted viola tions of rights of the constitution and other known legal rights. When a dispute is taken to court, one side of the court is of the view that a ruling for the challenger would expose the security of the nation while the other side is of the opinion that the ideals that make the preservation of the nation’s security worth should be held at all costs. Many courts, in their habeas corpus jurisdiction, have handled issues regarding separation of powers during wars. The writ of habeas corpus is a mechanism in which the courts have insisted that none of the King, the President or any other official may subject someone to detention unless a court of law does so. As long as the writ runs and in any given circumstance, including war, the courts have the power to enforcement of the most basic law