From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ex parte Milligan
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued March 5, 1866 Decided April 3, 1866
Full case name: Ex parte Lambdin P. Milligan Citations: 71 U.S. 2; 4 Wall. 2; 18 L. Ed. 281; 1866 U.S. LEXIS 861 Prior history: This case came before the Court upon a certificate of division from the judges of the Circuit Court for Indiana, on a petition for discharge from unlawful imprisonment.
Holding
Suspension of habeas corpus is unconstitutional when civilian courts are still operating; the Constitution provided for suspension of habeas corpus only if civilian courts are actually forced closed.
Court membership
Chief Justice: Salmon P. Chase Associate Justices: James Moore Wayne, Samuel Nelson, Robert Cooper Grier, Nathan Clifford, Noah Haynes Swayne, Samuel Freeman Miller, David Davis, Stephen Johnson Field
Case opinions
Majority by: Davis Joined by: Clifford, Field, Grier, Nelson Concurrence by: Chase Joined by: Wayne, Swayne, Miller
Laws applied
U.S. Const.

Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2 (1866), was an important United States Supreme Court case involving civilians and military tribunals.

Contents 1 Background of the case 2 The Court's decision 3 See also 4 External links

Lambdin P. Milligan and four others were accused of planning to steal Union weapons and invade Union prisoner-of-war camps and were 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.

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 held without charges, not tried, and certainly not executed by military tribunals. After all, the writ of habeas corpus is not the right itself but merely the ability to issue orders demanding the right's enforcement.

It is important to note the political environment of the decision. Post-war, under a Republican Congress, the Court was reluctant to hand down any decision that questioned the legitimacy of military courts, especially in the occupied South. The President's ability to suspend habeas corpus independently of Congress, a central issue, was left unaddressed. That notwithstanding, military jurisdiction had been limited.

• Supreme Court cases of the American Civil War
• List of United States Supreme Court cases
• Ex Parte Merryman
• Ex parte Quirin
• Hamdi v. Rumsfeld

• Full text of the decision courtesy of Findlaw.com
• Historical analysis of the case - Elisheva Ruth Coleman Princeton University senior thesis