Under what circumstances

[Major Tom]

could the federal government call for/enforce 'martial law'? What happens under 'Martial Law"? What are the limits forced on citizens?
With Biden and O'Bama running things; how likely are they to do that?

[Allen]

When you control the law you can do pretty much any thing you desire. We see that happening every day.

[Vern Humphrey]

Martial law can be proclaimed by any commissioned officer -- of course it can be unproclaimed by his superior.

Martial law suspends the courts and transfers their power to military tribunals.

[S.A. Boggs]

Major, your question is what can/will happen IF civilian control of the AO is lost AND the military have to come in and restore order. It will be harder for those living urban, than for us who live rural. Back in 2009 the History Channel did a show on what can/will happen if a major epidemic hit the world. Under those terms Martial Law will be needed.
Sam

- - - Updated - - -


Martial law can be proclaimed by any commissioned officer -- of course it can be unproclaimed by his superior.

Martial law suspends the courts and transfers their power to military tribunals.
Didn't President Lincoln suspend the writ of habeas corpus and imprison political leaders of Maryland?
Sam

[Tenboremag]

Where in the Constitution is the provision for declaring Martial Law and suspending the Constitutional rights of Citizens?

[dogtag]

Might beats Rights

[S.A. Boggs]

Might beats Rights
"ALL power comes from the barrel of a gun!"
Sam

[barretcreek]

We'll find out when Slo loses.

Actually we'll find out when we find out what all the newly imported terrorists have been told to do.

[Art]

Didn't President Lincoln suspend the writ of habeas corpus and imprison political leaders of Maryland?
Sam

Yes, and in more places than just Maryland. However it must be remembered that Habeas Corpus corpus is not a "right" but a "Privilege." While the Constitution treats it as an important concept it also allows it to be suspended in cases of "Rebellion" or "Invasion," or for "Public Safety" (Art.1 Sec. 9) which is pretty darn broad, probably too broad IMHO. Lincoln came under a lot of pressure over the legality of his unilateral suspension of Habeas Corpus without congressional approval and in 1863 the Congress ratified his decision and also, in that legislation stated that the President and his agents were to be held blameless for any suit filed related to anything they did re: Habeas Corpus before Congress acted.

One victim of the suspension of Habeas Corpus was an Ohio Copperhead Congressman named Clement Vallandigham (How's that for a moniker??) who was arrested for speeches sympathetic to the enemy. When he applied for Habeas Corpus his request was knocked down since he was deemed to come under the rebellion and public safety exceptions mentioned above.

[S.A. Boggs]

Yes, and in more places than just Maryland. However it must be remembered that Habeas Corpus corpus is not a "right" but a "Privilege." While the Constitution treats it as an important concept it also allows it to be suspended in cases of "Rebellion" or "Invasion," or for "Public Safety" (Art.1 Sec. 9) which is pretty darn broad, probably too broad IMHO. Lincoln came under a lot of pressure over the legality of his unilateral suspension of Habeas Corpus without congressional approval and in 1863 the Congress ratified his decision and also, in that legislation stated that the President and his agents were to be held blameless for any suit filed related to anything they did re: Habeas Corpus before Congress acted.

One victim of the suspension of Habeas Corpus was an Ohio Copperhead Congressman named Clement Vallandigham (How's that for a moniker??) who was arrested for speeches sympathetic to the enemy. When he applied for Habeas Corpus his request was knocked down since he was deemed to come under the rebellion and public safety exceptions mentioned above.
Wonder if he was related to the murdered Ohio prison guard @ Lucasville in94?
Sam

[dryheat]

speeches sympathetic to the enemy-. It isn't 1940. These days reporters can walk among the "enemy" and people (not necessarily "Americans") can root for their team. Young dumb kids. Well, it's nice to be youong and dumb.

[blackhawknj]

The Version I Have Heard is martial law is never declared in this country due to "insurance regulations."
Also to enforce it you need a rather large and well disciplined military which we lack at present. And a population that is easily cowed.

[Phloating Phlasher]

Wiki says:


Contents
(Top)
Legal basis

History

American Revolution
New Orleans in War of 1812
Nauvoo, Illinois, during the Illinois Mormon War (1843)
Utah War (1857)
Baltimore (1861)
Ex parte Milligan (1863)
The Great Chicago Fire (1871)
Coeur d'Alene, Idaho (1892)
San Francisco earthquake of 1906
Colorado Coalfield War (1914 and 1917)
West Virginia Coal Wars (1920-1921)
Minneapolis, Minnesota (1934)
San Francisco, California (1934)
Territory of Hawaii in World War II (1941-1944)
Russell County, Alabama (1954?55)
Freedom Riders (1961)
2007 National Defense Authorization Act
References
Further reading

Martial law in the United States

Article
Talk

Read
Edit
View history

Tools

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Martial law in the United States refers to times in United States history in which in a region, state, city, or the whole United States was placed under the control of a military body. On a national level, both the US President and the US Congress have the power, within certain constraints, to impose martial law since both can be in charge of the militia. In each state, the governor has the power to impose martial law within the borders of the state.[citation needed] In the United States, martial law has been used in a limited number of circumstances, such as New Orleans during the Battle of New Orleans; after major disasters, such as the Great Chicago Fire of 1871, the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, or during riots, such as the Omaha race riot of 1919 or the 1920 Lexington riots; local leaders declared martial law to protect themselves from mob violence, such as Nauvoo, Illinois, during the Illinois Mormon War, or Utah during the Utah War; or in response to chaos associated with protests and rioting, such as the 1934 West Coast waterfront strike, in Hawaii after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, and during the Civil Rights Movement in response to the Cambridge riot of 1963.
Legal basis

The martial law concept in the United States is closely tied to the right of habeas corpus, which is, in essence, the right to a hearing and trial on lawful imprisonment, or more broadly, the supervision of law enforcement by the judiciary. The ability to suspend habeas corpus is related to the imposition of martial law.[1] Article 1, Section 9 of the US Constitution states, "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." There have been many instances of the use of the military within the borders of the United States, such as during the Whiskey Rebellion and in the South during the Civil Rights Movement, but those acts are not tantamount to a declaration of martial law. Deployment of troops does not necessarily mean that the civil courts cannot function, which is one of the keys,[vague] as the US Supreme Court noted,[citation needed] to martial law.

In United States law, martial law is limited by several court decisions that were handed down between the American Civil War and World War II. In 1878, Congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids US military involvement in domestic law enforcement without congressional approval.

Throughout history, martial law has been imposed at least 68[2] times in limited, usually local areas of the United States. Martial law was declared for these reasons: Twice for war or invasion, seven times for domestic war or insurrection, eleven times for riot or civil unrest, 29 times for labor dispute, four times for natural disaster and fifteen times for other reasons.[2] Habeas corpus was suspended federally only once in 1863 during the Civil War.

[Major Tom]

Does it read in the Constitution or other article from our forefathers that people have the right to overthrow a government? Where is that written?

[Phloating Phlasher]

"All Enemies, Foreign & Domestic"?

The current Oath of Allegiance of the United States is as follows:

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.

[Vern Humphrey]

Does it read in the Constitution or other article from our forefathers that people have the right to overthrow a government? Where is that written?

The Declaration of Independence is what you want there.

"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."