Stephen Miller's Argument for Suspending Habeas Corpus Is Legal Garbage

[babylonsister]

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/marjorie-cohn/113832/stephen-miller-s-argument-for-suspending-habeas-corpus-is-legal-garbage

Stephen Miller’s Argument for Suspending Habeas Corpus Is Legal Garbage
by Marjorie Cohn | May 13, 2025 - 5:27am

— from Truthout

snip//

Only Congress, Not the President, Has the Power to Suspend Habeas Corpus

Contrary to Miller’s assertion, only Congress — not the president — can suspend habeas corpus, and only in rare circumstances. “Although [the Suspension Clause] does not state that suspension must be effected by, or authorized by, a legislative act, it has been so understood, consistent with English practice and the Clause’s placement in Article I,” Antonin Scalia wrote in dissent in the Supreme Court’s 2004 decision in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld. (Article I of the Constitution lists the powers of Congress).

snip//

There Is No “Invasion”

Miller is also wrong because there is no “invasion” currently occurring in the United States, despite several of Donald Trump’s January 20 executive orders declaring that there is an invasion of the southern U.S. border.

snip//

In February 2024, a federal district court in Texas rejected the equating of immigration with an invasion, concluding that “surges in immigration do not constitute an ‘invasion’ within the meaning of the Constitution.”

snip//

For now, federal judges are serving as speed bumps in Trump’s cruel and illegal war on migrants. Trump has packed the Supreme Court with radical right-wingers who may well overturn some of those lower court rulings. But Trump has already defied the high court’s ruling that his administration facilitate the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia from El Salvador. We can only hope that the “justices” on the high court maintain their reverence for the Constitution, even though the president does not.

[gab13by13]

1. "Speed Bumps" is a good description.

Court decisions that can't be enforced are merely speed bumps on the way to autocracy.

The upcoming Supreme Court decision over "birthright citizenship" is much more about neutering the lower courts. This SC decision will decide if lower courts can make rulings that effect the entire country, or if they are limited to only decisions in the their circuits which would basically neuter the lower courts and throw everything to the Supreme Court.

[Jilly_in_VA]

2. Stephen Miller is legally garbage

and should be put in the nearest toxic waste detail for pickup.

[no_hypocrisy]

3. Start at the Beginning:

Miller said that Due Process and Habeas Corpus are a PRIVILEGE, IOW, a license that can be revoked under certain circumstances.

NO!! Both Due Process and Habeas Corpus are RIGHTS, inherent in the Constitution, in our constitutional republic, and American Democracy. The former can't be revoked and the latter under severe specified conditions that must be met.

[babylonsister]

4. Well, we know the lot of them make it up as they go along,

this is no different. I do rather enjoy articles like this that make such fools of them.

[Midnight Writer]

5. "Legal garbage". Just like Citizens United, corporations are people, money is speech, Presidents have immunity.

None of this crap is even hinted at in our Constitution, yet, because Republicans pushed these "legal garbage" theories forward, they are now the law of the land.

[struggle4progress]

6. The day the nazi died

[LetMyPeopleVote]

7. Maddow Blog-Kristi Noem flunks an important test on the basic meaning of habeas corpus

The homeland security secretary was asked to define habeas corpus. Her outrageously wrong answer was humiliating — but it was also important.

It's tempting to laugh at Kristi Noem’s humiliating ignorance about the meaning of habeas corpus, but this isn’t just some embarrassing gaffe.

Given the scope of her powers, her cluelessness matters.

(And in a healthier environment, Noem would be forced to resign in embarrassment right about now.)

— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2025-05-20T16:48:08.242Z

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/kristi-noem-flunks-important-test-basic-meaning-habeas-corpus-rcna207982

There’s been considerable discussion in recent weeks about basic legal principles such as habeas corpus and the degree to which the Trump administration is hostile toward the bedrock foundations of the American system of government. What’s gone largely overlooked, however, is whether Trump administration officials have a high-school-civics-class-level understanding of what these legal principles are.

Take Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, for example. Axios reported:

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem botched questions about habeas corpus at a Senate hearing Tuesday, falsely asserting the check on the government’s power to detain people actually gives President Trump a “constitutional right” to conduct deportations.

There’s been considerable discussion in recent weeks about basic legal principles such as habeas corpus and the degree to which the Trump administration is hostile toward the bedrock foundations of the American system of government. What’s gone largely overlooked, however, is whether Trump administration officials have a high-school-civics-class-level understanding of what these legal principles are.

Take Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, for example. Axios reported:

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem botched questions about habeas corpus at a Senate hearing Tuesday, falsely asserting the check on the government’s power to detain people actually gives President Trump a “constitutional right” to conduct deportations.
https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:4llrhdclvdlmmynkwsmg5tdc/post/3lpmbmmjkjk2i?ref_src=embed&ref_url=https%253A%252F%252Fiframe.nbcnews.com%252FM7Qndazh

Link to tweet

.....In case this weren’t quite enough, when Democratic Sen. Andy Kim of New Jersey asked the Cabinet secretary which part of the Constitution includes habeas corpus, Noem was again stumped.

https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:4llrhdclvdlmmynkwsmg5tdc/post/3lpmdrjzm4k2i?ref_src=embed&ref_url=https%253A%252F%252Fiframe.nbcnews.com%252FlyrF0Vwh

Link to tweet

The significance of this goes well beyond marveling at a powerful official’s ignorance. Earlier this month, Stephen Miller, a White House deputy chief of staff, told reporters that White House officials are “actively looking” at possibly suspending the writ of habeas corpus. If this were to happen, the Trump administration would have the power to lock people up without charges, and prisoners would not have the ability to contest their incarceration.

Eleven days after Miller made those comments, the homeland security secretary couldn’t even offer a basic definition of what habeas corpus is — despite the scope of her powers, and despite the fact that this legal principle has existed for the better part of a millennium.

In a healthier political environment, a fiasco such as this one would lead to credible discussion about whether Noem should be forced to resign in embarrassment.