Lincoln’s Defiance and Trump’s Case for Swift Deportation: Lessons from Ex Parte Merryman
By: G. Dolf Olorin (attributing some research and drafting to Super Grok)
Introduction
During the Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln faced an unprecedented crisis that threatened the very existence of the United States. With the nation torn apart by rebellion, Lincoln took bold and controversial actions to preserve the Union, including the suspension of habeas corpus and defiance of a court order in the Ex parte Merryman case. These actions, while criticized by some, were necessary to address the existential threat posed by the Confederacy. Today, we can draw parallels between Lincoln's decisive leadership and the need for strong measures to address the modern crisis of illegal immigration, as exemplified by President Trump's efforts to arrest, detain and deport illegal aliens swiftly. Trump could follow Lincoln’s precedent and use the military to rebuff any attempt by the judiciary to enforce injunctions, writs or contempt orders.
The Biden Administration Insurrection that Caused the Crisis of the Illegal Alien Invasion
“Insurrection” is an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government. Under the U. S. Constitution, the immigration laws of the United States enacted by Congress - to be enforced by the President and agencies of Executive Branch -as it concerns legal and illegal immigration into this country, is the “civil authority and established government”.
Before taking office, President Joe Biden swore the following oath: "I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Similarly, all members of his cabinet and policymakers swore to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic" and to "bear true faith and allegiance to the same."
However, the Biden administration's actions concerning immigration and border security directly contradicted these oaths. By intentionally refusing to enforce immigration laws and protect the border, the Biden administration’s insurrection allowed and facilitated an invasion of the United States by millions of illegal aliens - with terrorists, criminals and criminal gang members among them - that endanger the Public safety and who, along with the insurrectionists harboring and supporting them, subvert the authority of the People through the dilution of the legitimate electorate of citizens.
Through executive orders, the administration halted the construction of the border wall, reinstated "catch and release" policies, and restricted Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from deporting illegal aliens. These decisions dismantled the legal framework designed to regulate immigration and protect national sovereignty and Public safety.
As a result, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) reported over 2.3 million encounters with illegal aliens at the southern border in fiscal year 2022, a record-breaking figure. Millions more have entered undetected or been released into the country under relaxed asylum procedures.
By refusing to enforce the enacted immigration laws, the administration has usurped legislative authority and undermined the separation of powers. This deliberate neglect constitutes an insurrection against the constitutional order, as it subverts the rule of law and the will of the American people. The massive influx of illegal aliens, encouraged by the Biden administration's policies, amounts to an invasion of the United States. The Constitution recognizes the gravity of such threats, allowing for the suspension of habeas corpus "when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."
The Ex Parte Merryman Case: A Necessary Defiance
Historical Context
In April 1861, the Confederacy's attack on Fort Sumter ignited the Civil War, and Maryland—a border state with divided loyalties—became a flashpoint. To secure vital rail and communication lines, Lincoln authorized the suspension of habeas corpus along military routes. This decision was crucial to preventing Confederate sympathizers from sabotaging Union efforts. John Merryman, a Maryland secessionist, was arrested for leading a militia that destroyed railroad bridges to impede Union troop movements. His lawyers sought a writ of habeas corpus from Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, who ruled that only Congress could suspend habeas corpus and ordered Merryman's release.
Lincoln’s Justified Defiance
Lincoln, however, recognized the gravity of the situation and chose to defy the court order. He believed that the Constitution's Suspension Clause, which allows for the suspension of habeas corpus "when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it," gave him the authority to act decisively in the face of rebellion. Lincoln's decision was not an act of tyranny but a calculated move to prevent the collapse of the federal government and ensure the survival of the nation.
In his message to Congress on July 4, 1861, Lincoln eloquently defended his actions: "Are all the laws, but one, to go unexecuted, and the government itself go to pieces, lest that one be violated?" This rhetorical question underscores the dilemma Lincoln faced: adhere strictly to one constitutional provision and risk the destruction of the entire system, or take extraordinary measures to save the nation. Lincoln chose the latter, demonstrating his commitment to the preservation of the United States over its destruction. His defiance of the court order was not only legally defensible but also essential to maintaining order during a time of rebellion.
The Military’s Response to the Writ
When Taney issued the writ of habeas corpus, General Cadwalader refused to comply. He informed Taney that he was acting under Lincoln’s orders to suspend habeas corpus and that he had been instructed to detain Merryman securely. Cadwalader’s refusal was not a personal decision but a direct application of Lincoln’s broader policy, which prioritized military authority over judicial intervention in matters of national security during the crisis.
Taney’s Contempt Citation and the Marshal’s Role
Frustrated by Cadwalader’s noncompliance, Taney issued a contempt citation against him, asserting that the military had no right to defy a judicial order. To enforce this contempt ruling, a U.S. Marshal was dispatched to Fort McHenry to serve the citation on Cadwalader. However, when the Marshal arrived at the fort, he was met with resistance from the military guards stationed there.
How the Military Rebuffed the Marshal
The military guards at Fort McHenry, acting under the authority of Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus, denied the U.S. Marshal entry to the fort. They informed him that they had orders not to allow anyone to see Cadwalader without his explicit permission. This physical barrier prevented the Marshal from serving the contempt citation, effectively nullifying Taney’s attempt to enforce his judicial ruling. The guards’ actions were a direct consequence of the standing orders tied to Lincoln’s suspension policy, which gave the military discretion to ignore civilian court orders in the affected areas.
Lincoln’s Role
While there is no evidence of a specific directive from Lincoln ordering the military to block the Marshal in this particular instance, the rebuffing of the Marshal stemmed from Lincoln’s general order to suspend habeas corpus. This policy empowered military officials like Cadwalader to act independently of judicial oversight, including refusing to comply with writs of habeas corpus and subsequent enforcement attempts by civilian authorities like the U.S. Marshal. Lincoln’s administration later supported these actions, with the President defending the suspension in his July 4, 1861, address to Congress, arguing it was necessary to preserve the Union.
Sequence of Events
To clarify the progression:
- Taney issues the writ of habeas corpus to compel Merryman’s appearance in court.
- Cadwalader refuses to comply, citing Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus.
- Taney issues a contempt citation against Cadwalader for defying the writ.
- The U.S. Marshal attempts to serve the contempt order at Fort McHenry.
- Military guards deny the Marshal entry, following orders linked to the suspension, thereby preventing enforcement of Taney’s ruling.
Outcome
Taney, recognizing his lack of power to compel the military, concluded that the President had assumed authority over habeas corpus and that the judiciary could not enforce its orders against the military in this context. The Marshal’s inability to serve the contempt citation underscored the supremacy of Lincoln’s wartime policy over judicial authority in this case.
In summary, Lincoln ordered the military to suspend habeas corpus in the region, which led the military to rebuff the U.S. Marshal by denying him entry to Fort McHenry to serve the contempt citation on General Cadwalader. This action was a direct result of Lincoln’s broader suspension policy rather than a specific command tailored to the Merryman case.
Lincoln’s Actions as Precedent for President Trump’s Deportation Policies
Just as Lincoln confronted a rebellion that threatened the Union, President Trump faces an existential crisis endangering the United States and “We the People” as the legitimate citizens constituting this Republic: an influx of illegal aliens that strained national resources, undermined the rule of law, posed security risks, caused great harm to Public safety and seeks to supplant the authority of the People that elected President Trump to quickly arrest, detain and deport millions of illegal aliens. The sheer number of individuals entering the country without authorization can be seen as an "invasion," a term that, under the Constitution, justifies the suspension of habeas corpus and all other lawfare and judicial activism designed to slow or halt deportations. Trump’s policies aimed at the expeditious deportation of illegal aliens are not only legally sound but also necessary to address this modern-day invasion. By acting decisively, Trump is following in Lincoln's footsteps, prioritizing national security, the Public safety and the enforcement of immigration laws.
Conclusion
Lincoln’s defiance of the court order in Ex parte Merryman was a courageous act of leadership in the face of rebellion. His suspension of habeas corpus, though controversial, was necessary to preserve the Union and uphold the rule of law. Today, as the United States faces the devastating results of an invasion of millions of illegal aliens, Lincoln’s actions provide a powerful precedent for swift and decisive measures, such as those pursued by President Trump. The Constitution’s allowance for the suspension of habeas corpus and defiance of judicial interference and activism seeking to usurping executive branch authority justifies Trump’s continued, unobstructed and swift arrest, detention and deportation of illegal aliens including the terrorists, criminals and criminal gang members among them receiving priority.
