Article II Discussion - Article II Discussion(draft...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Article II Discussion (draft) Discussion Questions/Prompts : Read Article II of Constitution Know powers of president: o What are the president’s expressed, implied and inherent powers? o What powers are shared with other branches? o Defend or reject the notion that “the president derives his influence more from the exercise, rather than the delegation of powers” What role did the framers have in mind for the President? How would the following evaluate the role or status or power of the modern presidency: Madison, Jefferson, and Lincoln? What has contributed to the increase in presidential power since the end of WWII? Defend or reject the notion that “the president’s power has increased to such a degree that not much keeps Congress from becoming irrelevant? Rank order the following qualities of a successful president, and speculate what is the most important: intelligence, judgment, character, personality, flexibility Supreme Court Cases (etc) to Know (summaries follow): Ex Parte Milligan (1864) Korematsu v. U.S. (1944) War Powers Resolution (1973) Dellums v. Bush (1990) Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2005) 1
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Ex Parte Milligan* Ex parte Milligan (1866) was a United States Supreme Court case that ruled that the application of military tribunals to citizens when civilian courts are still operating is unconstitutional. Background of the case Lambdin P. Milligan and four others were accused of planning to steal Union weapons and invade Union prisoner-of-war camps . Once the first prisoner of war camp was liberated they planned to use the liberated soldiers to help fight against the Government of Indiana and free other camps of Confederate soldiers. They also planned to take over the state governments of Indiana, Ohio , and Michigan . When the plan leaked, they were charged, found guilty, and sentenced to hang by a military court in 1864. However, their execution was not set until May 1865, so they were able to argue the case after the Civil War ended. Arguments The argument for the United States was delivered by Benjamin F. Butler , a Massachusetts lawyer and state legislator, and future Governor of Massachusetts. The argument for the petitioner was delivered by Jeremiah S. Black , former Attorney General and Secretary of State, James A. Garfield , future President, and New York lawyer David Dudley Field . The Court's decision The Supreme Court decided that the suspension of habeas corpus was lawful, but military tribunals did not apply to citizens in states that had upheld the authority of the Constitution and where civilian courts were still operating, and the Constitution of the United States provided for suspension of habeas corpus only if these courts are actually forced closed. In essence, the Court ruled that military tribunals could not try civilians in areas where civil courts were open, even during times of war. It observed further that during the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, citizens may be only
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 12/14/2009 for the course GOVT 32 taught by Professor Lind during the Spring '09 term at École Normale Supérieure.

Page1 / 7

Article II Discussion - Article II Discussion(draft...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online