FCC, U. In the kind of emergency that would justify the declaration of martial law, the government might not have to provide the same comprehensive procedures required in ordinary times before detaining someone or confiscating property.
But the right to due process remains, along with all other constitutional rights, and the federal courts have the power to decide whether they have been violated. At a minimum, in a state or territory that the federal government has placed under martial law, individuals who have been detained by the military may ask a federal court to order their release by petitioning for the writ of habeas corpus.
When determining whether the military has exceeded its statutory authority, courts will construe that authority narrowly. Usually, the term martial law refers to the military taking the place of civilian authorities. The Court explained that martial law has never been precisely or conclusively defined. The Court concluded that, because these principles are deeply engrained in U.
For instance, a statute might expressly authorize the use of military tribunals to try civilians in areas where an invasion has resulted in the closure of the courts and the government has declared martial law. The Supreme Court has expressly held that individual states have the power to declare martial law. The Posse Comitatus Act does not apply to the states and thus does not affect their ability to use their military forces for domestic law enforcement.
Instead, a state declaration of martial law is valid simply if it is authorized by the constitution or laws of the state. But this does not mean that states can do whatever they want. The Supremacy Clause establishes that the U. The Supreme Court has emphasized that even under martial law, state officials are bound both by the U.
Constitution and by valid federal laws. If individuals wish to challenge a state declaration of martial law, they may seek injunctive relief in federal court — or, if they have been detained, they may petition for the writ of habeas corpus. Mott, 25 U. See also Sterling , U. However, the court will examine whether any military actions taken under that declaration have run afoul of the Constitution or federal law.
On that question, the Supreme Court ruled in Moyer v. Peabody and Sterling v. In other words, it suggests that in an emergency, good faith and a direct relationship between means and ends are enough to satisfy the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. But it is not clear that good faith and a direct relationship alone would be enough to satisfy due process or other constitutional requirements today.
Moyer and Sterling are very old cases. Oklahoma, U. Aaron, U. Virginia, U. Moreno, U. Eldridge, U. Cleburne Living Center, Inc. Evans, U. Under those precedents, it is likely that the Court would apply a more demanding standard of review.
The Constitution gives Congress authority to regulate the domestic deployment of the military, and Congress has enacted comprehensive legislation in that area. Because that legislation does not include authorization for the president to impose martial law, the president has no power to do so. Even if Congress were to provide authorization, the Supreme Court has not conclusively decided that the federal government is constitutionally empowered to declare martial law.
The state martial law power is more clearly established, but there are significant limits. The exact scope and limits of martial law will thus remain dangerously unclear until Congress and state legislatures enact new laws that better define them.
Beyond this, the Supreme Court precedent is too old, sparse, and inconsistent to provide any certainty around martial law. Indeed, in the absence of legislation specifically addressing martial law, even the above principles are subject to competing interpretations and would likely be disputed by executive officials seeking to use military forces more aggressively.
Moreover, even without the power to declare martial law, the president still has extensive authority to deploy the military domestically to perform law enforcement functions. The Insurrection Act — and possibly Title 32 as well — leave it almost entirely up to the president to decide when and where to use U. To some observers, a deployment of troops under the Insurrection Act might look and feel very much like martial law.
Given the degree of confusion over the term, some within the media or the government itself might even call it martial law. The knowledge and insight they contributed through conversations and correspondence greatly benefited the report. Explore Our Work.
Conclusion Acknowledgments. Viewing Preface. Back to Top. Although Hawaii was an incorporated territory, not a state, in , the Supreme Court found that the Constitution applied there in full and that the legality of martial law must be analyzed as though it were a state. Harry N. William C. John M. Uniform Code of Military Justice, 64 Stat. Luther , 48 U.
Mark E. Joseph R. Sterling , U. Milligan , 71 U. Medellin v. Youngstown , U. Jennifer K. Hamdan , U. Quirin , U. The full text of 10 U. What is now 10 U. For examples, one need only look to the Kent State massacre in or incidents during the military deployment to Los Angeles during the riots. United States v. Boumediene , U. Moyer , U. Skinner v. August 4, The law generally prevents the president from using the military as a domestic police force.
Joseph Nunn. October 14, Measure ad performance. Select basic ads. Create a personalised ads profile. Select personalised ads. Apply market research to generate audience insights. Measure content performance. Develop and improve products. List of Partners vendors. Your Money. Personal Finance. Your Practice. Popular Courses. What Is Martial Law? Key Takeaways: Martial law is law administered by the military rather than a civilian government, typically to restore order.
Martial law is declared in an emergency, in a response to a crisis, or to control occupied territory. When martial law is declared, civil liberties, such as the right to free movement, free speech, protection from unreasonable searches, and habeas corpus laws may be suspended. In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.
Done at the city of Washington, this 5th day of July, A. Skip to main content. The American Presidency Project. Toggle navigation. Abraham Lincoln. Benjamin Moeur Terminating Authority: Unclear. Precipitating Event: Dispute over drilling for oil on the grounds of the Oklahoma state capitol building. Marland Terminating Authority: Unclear. Emmitt Quinn Terminating Authority: Unclear. Related Litigation: Narragansett Racing Ass'n v.
Kiernan, 59 R. Rivers Terminating Authority: See notes. Related Litigation: Miller v. Rivers, 31 F. Miller, Ga. Notes: Governor Rivers's imposition of martial law was the subject of extensive litigation. It was enjoined by both state and federal courts, but Rivers did not concede defeat until the Georgia Supreme Court ruled against him on April 10, It is unclear if or when he formally rescinded the declaration of martial law.
Leon C. Phillips Terminating Authority: Gov. Related Litigation: "United States v. Phillips, 33 F. State of Okla. United States, F. Explore Our Work. Viewing Preface. Back to Top. Yes Related Litigation: Habeas and contempt proceedings in the federal district court in New Orleans Notes: This was the first declaration of martial law in U.
President Franklin Roosevelt approves the declaration of martial law in Hawaii after the attack on Pearl Harbor, Yes Related Litigation: Duncan v.
No Notes: This was the first time that the U. Brigham Young declares martial law during the Utah War, No Notes: Although Governor Young declared martial law under color of his authority as the territorial governor, he did so in order to facilitate armed resistance to approaching federal troops.
Fremont declares martial law in Missouri in response to the Camp Jackson Affair and a Confederate insurgency, Civil War Declaring Authority: Gen. Unclear Related Litigation: Clark v. Dick, 5 F. Abraham Lincoln declares martial law during the U. Civil War, Civil War Declaring Authority: Pres. Ohio Notes: Rather than declaring martial law over a particular area, Proclamation 94 applied martial law to "all rebels and insurgents, their aiders and abettors, within the United States, and all persons discouraging volunteer enlistments, resisting militia draft or guilty of any disloyal practice affording aid and comfort to rebels against the authority of the United States.
Abraham Lincoln declares martial law in Kentucky during the U. Unclear North Carolina Gov. William Holden declares martial law during the Kirk-Holden War, Unclear Texas Gov. Absalom Baird declares martial law in response to the New Orleans massacre of Unclear Notes: Gen. Watson Squire declares martial law in Seattle in response to anti-Chinese rioting, Ohio Gov. Nash declares martial law in response to the Akron riot of James Ferguson declares martial law in response to the Houston riot of No Texas Gov.
Hobby declares martial law in response to the Longview race riot of No Gen. Marshall declares martial law after a lynch mob attempts to storm the Lexington, Kentucky courthouse, Charles Barrett declares martial law in response to the Tulsa, Oklahoma race riot, No Ohio Gov. Victor Donahey declares martial law in Niles following the anti-Klan riot of Dan Moody declares martial law in response to the Sherman riot of Unclear Acting Texas Gov.
Yes Maryland Gov. Millard Tawes declares martial law in response to the Cambridge riot of No Notes: Martial law was briefly lifted between July 8 and July 13, Pennsylvania Gov.
John Frederick Hartranft declares martial law during the Scranton general strike, No Idaho Gov. Unclear Pennsylvania Gov. Pattison declares martial law during the Homestead strike, No Illinois Gov. John Riley Tanner declares martial law in Pana in response to a coal miner strike, William Stone declares martial law in several counties during the coal strike of Unclear Related Litigation: Commonwealth ex rel.
James Peabody declares martial law in Teller County during the Colorado labor wars, Unclear Related Litigation: Moyer v. Yes Related Litigation: State ex rel. Yes Related Litigation: Hatfield v. Graham, 73 W. Samuel Ralston declares martial law during the Indianapolis streetcar strike of No Montana Gov.
0コメント