The transformation of the American legal mind: Habeas corpus, federalism, and constitutionalism, 1787-1870

This study examines judicial conflicts caused by habeas corpus from the formation of the Constitution to Tarble's Case (1870). Intending to create a strong central government, the framers inserted the habeas corpus clause into the Constitution. It gave the federal government the power to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in a constitutional crisis such as rebellion or invasion. Yet American legal culture valued liberty above all else and interpreted the clause as a restraint on power rather than as a grant of power. States' rights doctrine had a tremendous impact on courts, state and federal, in the antebellum period. The supremacy of state courts was established by issuing writs of habeas corpus for prisoners confined under the authority of the federal government. But whenever the Union faced an emergency, states' rights doctrine and the principle of state habeas for federal prisoners were challenged. During the Civil War, the suspension of habeas corpus was an effective war measure, preventing draft evasion and disloyalty and helping maintain military morale. Through Reconstruction acts and amendments, habeas corpus became available for every person in the Union, regardless of race. The federal government became the final guarantor of personal liberty and the Union adopted the principle of federal habeas for state prisoners.

Name thesis:degree_name

Ph.D.

Level thesis:degree_level

Dissertation

Discipline thesis:degree_discipline

History

Grantor

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Year dc:date

2011

Author dc:creator

• Cho, Ji-Hyung

Contributors dc:contributor

• Johannsen, Robert W.

• History, United States
• Law
• Political Science, General

Statement dc:rights

• Copyright 1995 Cho, Ji-Hyung

Language dc:language

eng

Identifier

(UMI)AAI9524246
AAI9524246

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/21552