[Jmurman]

If so, what does that mean for the current laws on the books? Would they be suspended also?

[Derek Zeanah]

Civil War.

[Jerrywahid]

Never mind...I couldn't come up with anything.

[Ed Brunner]

THe constitition says that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Does it look to you like it has been suspended?

[444]

Every single time a gun law has been enacted.

[Battler]

Honestly, it would be easier to look for a time when it's ever been taken seriously.

[rock jock]

THe constitition says that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

I guess you don't own any guns, huh? Or maybe you just don't understand the difference between suspended and restricted.

[Safety First]

Yup, every time a know Knock Warrant is signed and served

[Matthew Courtney]

The Government does not have the authority to suspend the Constitution. Only the people have that power(10th amendment). If the Constitution ever were suspended, it would not mean that there were no limits on government power, it would mean that the government no longer has any authority, as all government authority in the U.S. is derived from and dependent on the Constitution.

[.45Ruger]

Abe Lincon suspended all kinds of rights from freedom of the press, to Habeus Corpus to locking up people who disagreed with him publibly. During WW2 American citizens of Japanese, Italian and German ancestry were locked up because of something they might do. THe entire Bill of Rights has been on suspension sice FDR packed the Supreme Court with three more justices to get his Unconstitiutional New Deal crap validated. Congress now passes all kinds of laws outside the powers granted by the COnstitution. From limits on Political speech proposed by my own tur-coat Senator Mcain to things like welfare, Social security and many other programs. Congess also seems to black mail states into going along with this BS or they loose their federal highway dollars. I believe it is time to ammend the Constitution to spell out EXACTLY what congress, and the Pres may and may not do and put in a provision that any government official found to violating those limits goes to jail. END OF TIRADE

[Mark Tyson]

The constitution has been suspended officially in a few isolated areas for short periods of time, usually after riots. In these cases, civil courts were replaced with military courts - this is the official meaning of martial law.

[justice4all]

At least since Marbury v. Madison.

[SteelyDan]

This strikes me as a fascinating question, to which I don't pretend to have an answer. I was taught in law school, and still believe, that the Constitution sets forth THE most fundamental principles of the republic. I cannot conceive of how it might be "suspended," or how anyone could claim to have the authority to suspend the same. I mean, we can argue the semantics of judicial interpretation, but actually suspending the Constitution?? I can't even imagine.

If it came right down to it, the government would never say (well, never say never) it was suspending the Constitution, it would just say it was exercising emergency powers. But even in an emergency situation, they would have no authority to ignore the Constitution. Bottom line: the government's powers come from the Constitution, and the limitations on government's powers come from the same, amended, document. So, any attempt to ignore or suspend the Constitution would be unlawful.

[El Tejon]

No.

[Battler]

Since the word "Constitution" is only really refused to refer to something that isn't actually in it (e.g. when a liberal calls something "unconstitutional" because he doesn't like it).

Should the real question be:

"Has there ever been a time when politicians stop using the word Constitution in a sentence."

[Brett Bellmore]

No, the government doesn't have any authority to suspend the Constitution. Although there IS constitutional authority for CONGRESS, not the President, (Lincoln's actions were unconstitutional.) to suspend habeas corpus "when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public safety may require it." But that's not the entire Constitution, just part of it.

http://www.etymonline.com/cw/habeas.htm

Mind you, suspending habeas corpus removes any capacity the courts might have to enforce the rest of the Constitution...

I'd say Matthew has it right: The federal government's authority derives from the Constitution; Suspend it, and the federal government would as a legal matter cease to exist, not become legally omnipotent. The only problem with that is that when the feds decide to "suspend the Constitution", they're declaring that they don't care whether what they do is legal. At that point they're not relying on legitimacy, they're relying on their ability to kill anybody who crosses them. Unless your copy of the Constitution has a kevlar cover, it's not going to do well at stopping bullets.

[Ian]

Has it been officially suspended, as in the President getting up and saying "The Constitutional will not be regonized as a limit on government for the next 38 days"? No. The would be a bit too blatant ever for scuzzy politicians. Instead they just ignore it whenever convenient. That has the exact same effect, but it lets people easily ignore what's happening because it's not announced.

[El Tejon]

Good one, Ian. Ignored, but not suspended.

Perhaps a distinction without difference?:(

[Brett Bellmore]

I think a key point to remember is that the President declaring that the Constitution is suspended would NOT "offically" suspend the Constitution, since he doesn't have that authority in the first place. Depending on the loyalties of the army, he might have that power, though. But it still wouldn't be "suspended", it would merely be "violated". Only Congress can legally suspend habeas corpus, and only the states could suspend the Constitution.

[Jeeper]

At least since Marbury v. Madison.

Why would you think that the most historical case defining the supreme court power is suspending the constitution.


Article 3 Section 2

The judicial power SHALL extend to all cases....


Obvioulsy we cant fully debate a subject so large here since it has been the topic of a billion law review articles but maybe we can briefly.

[SquirrelNuts]

Well, how many court rulings have determined a law to be unconstitutional? Quite a few, and those laws are being used every day. I would say it has been ignored every day since???? but I don't think it has ever been suspended.

-SquirrelNuts

[griz]

Ignored is probably the best term. Call me a radical but I believe the Constitution and the Bill of Rights mean what they say. It’s embarrassing that our government has gotten so bloated by usurping all the authority that it has. Maybe I should say that it’s embarrassing that we have let it get so bloated. For those who haven’t read it in a while, here is the tenth amendment in its entirety:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

If we took that seriously, the Federal government and your taxes would be cut in half.

[Ian]

Only half? :)

[El Tejon]

griz, if we took the Commerce Clause as its original purpose instead of a hammer of unlimited government, we would reduce the size of the federal monster by 95%!!!:cool:

[hops]

Somewhere in the Constitution there is a provison for suspension of writ of habeas Corpus during war or rebellion when public safety may require it. See Article I section 9 in the constitution. Lincon did enact this portion during the not so civil war.

Considering that during a civil war, that there was still a presidental election, in 1864, I'd say the constitution was still functioning for the most part.

I do like and agree with the comment about certain parts of the constitution being ignored in todays climate.

[TexasVet]

Abe Lincon suspended all kinds of rights from freedom of the press, to Habeus Corpus

I keep hearing that Lincoln was a tyrant because he "suspended the right of Habeus Corpus". Has not one of the many people who quote this while defending the Constitution ever actually READ the thing?

Article I, Section 9... "The Privilege* of the Writ of Habeus Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."

Full-fledged civil war seems to meet the standard to any reasonably intelligent individual.:rolleyes:

There are enough other questionable moves by Lincoln to bring up accurately, why use this one in error all the time?? Is it the 'oft-repeated lie becomes the truth" syndrome, ie, everyone has heard it so often that they no longer question it?

*(note, specifically noted as a "Privilege" not as a "Right")

[Matthew Courtney]

I keep hearing that Lincoln was a tyrant because he "suspended the right of Habeus Corpus". Has not one of the many people who quote this while defending the Constitution ever actually READ the thing?

It seems the one who needs read the Constitution is you. Article I, Section 9 gives to the Congress the authority to suspend the priviledge of habeas corpus.

[answerguy]

...you were a Japanese-American during WWII and were sent to the internment camps? For that matter the constitution was suspended for slaves too.

[TexasVet]

It seems the one who needs read the Constitution is you. Article I, Section 9 gives to the Congress the authority to suspend the priviledge of habeas corpus.

Didn't seem to bother any courts when Lincoln or FDR did it. Can't put my legal knowledge up against theirs.