Fort Sumter, in the harbor of Charleston, South Carolina, continued to fly the U.S. flag, even as Confederate forces surrounded it. Lincoln decided to resupply the fort but not reinforce it, unless resistance was met. After negotiations failed, the first shot was fired on April 12, 1861, in a bombardment that resulted in the fort's surrender. With that shot the Civil War began.

Lincoln’s Controversial Decision

Background:

The Writ of Habeas CorpusWrit: command with legal authority

Habeas: “you should have” or “to present”

Corpus: “the body”

This is a Constitutional rule that serves as a protection against illegal imprisonment by requiring due process of law:

a defendant should have the right to appear in court.

U.S. Constitution: Article I, Section 9.

Remember Lincoln’s Goal:

To preserve the Union.

So,To prevent the border states from seceding, he ordered the arrest of any Southern sympathizers.

April, 1861:

Fighting starts at Fort Sumter, SC

September, 1862:

President Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus, meaning people were not given their right to appear in court to fight their accusers.

There was rioting and violence among Southerners and sympathizers. Lincoln suspended habeas corpus in Maryland first (dangerous border state) so that he could put many rioters on trial.

Precedent?

What is a precedent?An earlier action/decision that is used as an example in future cases.

Question:Is Lincoln’s decision a bad precedent for future Presidents when facing war, riots, protests, etc?

In Summary:

Habeas Corpus: you have the right to appear before a judge and know why you are being held and what crimes you are accused of committing. It is designed to protect your rights.

Lincoln is a revered President by Americans today, but this decision remains controversial.

Was President Lincoln right to suspend the writ of habeas corpus? Consider the circumstances AND the precedent.

Discuss in a solid paragraph.(and you may include this as an example [pro or con] in your

Commentary essays!)