Speaker 1: Welcome to Brainstuff, a production of iHeartRadio, Hey Brainstuff, Lauren
Speaker 1: Bogelbaum here. For almost a thousand years, and in many societies,
Speaker 1: there's been a legal concept that a person cannot be
Speaker 1: imprisoned by their government unless that government has a valid
Speaker 1: and lawful reason for doing so. This is sometimes called
Speaker 1: habeas corpus, which is Latin for you have the body,
Speaker 1: which is basically a way of saying, Okay, you've got
Speaker 1: a prisoner in custody, bring that person before a judge
Speaker 1: so that we can figure out whether they're being imprisoned
Speaker 1: legally or not. In countries around the world, there are
Speaker 1: laws on the books that allow a prisoner to petition
Speaker 1: for habeas corpus relief, meaning that they can ask to
Speaker 1: have a judge look at whether it's legal that they've
Speaker 1: been detained. Habeas corpus doesn't have anything to do with
Speaker 1: the prisoner's guilt or innocence. It's just a matter of
Speaker 1: does the government have the right to detain me. It's
Speaker 1: a good question to be able to ask in terms
Speaker 1: of having human rights. So today let's talk about the
Speaker 1: history of habeas corpus. Habeas corpus was first clearly laid
Speaker 1: out in the year twelve fifteen in the Magna Carta,
Speaker 1: an English charter limiting the monarchy's power and establishing individual
Speaker 1: freedoms for the upper class. Anyway, it said in its
Speaker 1: thirty ninth clause is something to the extent of no
Speaker 1: man shall be arrested or imprisoned, except by the lawful
Speaker 1: judgment of his peers and by the law of the land.
Speaker 1: The Magna Carto was based on prior documents, but has
Speaker 1: often been cited as a foundation or inspiration for all
Speaker 1: of democratic law, and this clause in particular is pointed
Speaker 1: to as the basis for the system of trial by jury.
Speaker 1: Habeas corpus protections started really seeing use in the sixteen
Speaker 1: hundreds in England, both as a way to limit the
Speaker 1: monarchy's power to imprison people and to allow the monarchy
Speaker 1: to check other authorities power to imprison people. This was
Speaker 1: pertinent at the time, perhaps especially due to concerns about
Speaker 1: religious persecution. Parliament wrote the Habeas Corpus Act into law
Speaker 1: in sixteen seventy nine. A century later, the framers of
Speaker 1: the Constitution of the United States thought that it was
Speaker 1: important enough to include a mention in the Bill of rights.
Speaker 1: But Article one, Section nine, and Congress authorized federal courts
Speaker 1: to grant relief through it right off the bat in
Speaker 1: seventeen eighty nine when they began laying out the powers
Speaker 1: of the courts. So, habeas corpus is old, Does that
Speaker 1: mean that it's antiquated? The short answer is unequivocally no.
Speaker 1: Without it, no one is truly free, because anyone could
Speaker 1: be removed from their life and imprisoned indefinitely for no
Speaker 1: reason at all, with no access to the due process
Speaker 1: of a fair trial. In a decision handed down by
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court in nineteen ninety two, the justices substantiated
Speaker 1: the importance of habeas corpus, calling it quote the fundamental
Speaker 1: instrument for safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary and lawless state action.
Speaker 1: So how exactly does habeas corpus support the dignity of
Speaker 1: the legal process? Habeas corpus is part of a twofold process.
Speaker 1: In a petition for habeas corpus, a prisoner or another
Speaker 1: interested party raises doubts about the legality of their imprisonment.
Speaker 1: If the petition is successful in demonstrating that the imprisonment
Speaker 1: justifies an examination, a judge will issue a writ of
Speaker 1: habeas corpus. This is the order for the prisoner to
Speaker 1: be brought to court. At that time, the judge examines
Speaker 1: the issue again. The writ of habeas corpus isn't meant
Speaker 1: to determine whether the detainee is guilty of the crime
Speaker 1: that they're accused of. It's a call for examination of
Speaker 1: the legality of their imprisonment, was the due process of
Speaker 1: law followed. A due process is a group of constitutionally
Speaker 1: guaranteed rights that in the US includes a fair and
Speaker 1: speedy trial, access to legal counsel, freedom from unlawful search
Speaker 1: and seizure, a trial by a jury of peers, and
Speaker 1: an appearance before one's accusers. But even a constitutional guarantee
Speaker 1: carries little weight if there's no mechanism in place to
Speaker 1: grant recourse to the person on the receiving end of
Speaker 1: that guarantee. Habeas corpus ensures that the right to due
Speaker 1: process is supported by action. Since its inception, Congress has
Speaker 1: expanded federal court's power to provide habeas relief to state
Speaker 1: prisoners too, if their imprisonment is in violation of federal law,
Speaker 1: including civil rights. Sometimes habeas corpus is used as a
Speaker 1: last ditch strategic tool to obtain freedom for a defendant
Speaker 1: in a criminal case, but only after the appeals process
Speaker 1: has been exhausted. A court reviewing a habeas plea can
Speaker 1: consider new evidence, whereas in an appeal no new evidence
Speaker 1: can be submitted. Once an issue raised in a habeas
Speaker 1: plea has been decided, however, it cannot be debated again
Speaker 1: in regard to the same case. Habeas corpus is so
Speaker 1: important that several cases over the past one hundred years
Speaker 1: or so have confirmed the right of this due process
Speaker 1: to all people physically present in the United States or
Speaker 1: detained elsewhere by the government of the United States, regardless
Speaker 1: of that person's citizenship. The US Constitution provides for suspension
Speaker 1: of habeas corpus in only extreme and express cases, but
Speaker 1: as with any law, exactly when and what these cases
Speaker 1: are is subject to interpretation. The framers of the Constitution
Speaker 1: recognized that there are situations where revoking habeas corpus may
Speaker 1: be necessary for the common good. Article one, section nine
Speaker 1: states that habeas corpus quote shall not be suspended unless
Speaker 1: when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety
Speaker 1: may require it. The such instances have emerged throughout our history.
Speaker 1: During the Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus
Speaker 1: and a few specific situations starting in eighteen sixty one,
Speaker 1: which may have saved lives by allowing the Northern military
Speaker 1: to detain suspected spies, but was also technically legal until
Speaker 1: Congress approved the suspension in eighteen sixty three retroactively and
Speaker 1: for the duration of the war. Only Congress has the
Speaker 1: legal ability to suspend habeas corpus. They did so briefly
Speaker 1: during reconstruction in the South to prevent violence and intimidation
Speaker 1: from white supremacist groups like the KKK in parts of
Speaker 1: South Carolina. Another brief suspension of habeas corpus was put
Speaker 1: in place in the then territory of the Philippines by
Speaker 1: the American military in nineteen oh five during political unrest,
Speaker 1: but there was a larger instance after Japan bombed Pearl
Speaker 1: Harbor in nineteen forty one. More than one hundred and
Speaker 1: twenty thousand Japanese Americans were detained without recourse in Hawaii
Speaker 1: under martial law and along the west coast of the
Speaker 1: mainland by presidential decree. The majority were American born or
Speaker 1: naturalized citizens. The Department of Justice voiced ethical and constitutional objections,
Speaker 1: so the decree Executive Order in ninety sixty six authorized
Speaker 1: the military to exclude civilians from military areas. They divided
Speaker 1: the West Coast into military zones, evacuated Japanese Americans living there,
Speaker 1: and detained them in internment camps indefinitely with no due process.
Speaker 1: It was because of a writ of habeas corpus that
Speaker 1: the exclusion order was removed in late nineteen forty four,
Speaker 1: and the camps were shut down entirely by nineteen forty six.
Speaker 1: The twenty first century has seen suspensions of habeas corpus
Speaker 1: as well. After the attacks on September eleventh of two
Speaker 1: thousand and one, President George W. Bush and Congress concluded
Speaker 1: that conditions warranted repealing the right to habeas corpus. The
Speaker 1: Detainee Treatment Act of two thousand and five and the
Speaker 1: Military Commissions Act of two thousand and six removed any
Speaker 1: court's ability to hear a petition of habeas corpus for
Speaker 1: anyone deemed an enemy combatant by the US government, and
Speaker 1: they did so retroactively, relating to the detention of suspects
Speaker 1: following September eleventh in places like Guantanamo Bay. This was
Speaker 1: reversed by the Supreme Court in two thousand and eight. Then,
Speaker 1: in early twenty twenty five, the Trump administration began enacting
Speaker 1: mass arrest and detention of many different refugees, temporary migrants,
Speaker 1: and intendedly permanent immigrants living in the US in preparation
Speaker 1: for deporting them. The administration argued that the US is
Speaker 1: being invaded by such people and that many of them
Speaker 1: have violent criminal intent. As of June fifteenth of this year,
Speaker 1: over fifty six thousand people were actively being detained by
Speaker 1: Immigration and Customs Enforcement or ICE. Of those, seventy two
Speaker 1: percent had no criminal record at all, and only seven
Speaker 1: percent had any record of violence or property damage. Several
Speaker 1: people have successfully applied for habeas relief and have been released,
Speaker 1: and Supreme Court ruled in April that immigrants must be
Speaker 1: given enough notice of deportation to begin due process and
Speaker 1: petition for habeas relief if they choose. However, constitutional experts
Speaker 1: and human rights organizations have raised concerns that not all
Speaker 1: detainees understand or are able to access their right to
Speaker 1: due process because of the speed and scale of the detentions. Furthermore,
Speaker 1: officials in the administration have told the press that their
Speaker 1: considering suspended ding Habeas corpus entirely. This is a potential
Speaker 1: problem for everyone in America because without recourse against false
Speaker 1: or illegal imprisonment, you don't have the due process to
Speaker 1: prove that you haven't committed a crime, or that you
Speaker 1: are a citizen, or that you otherwise deserve to go free.
Speaker 1: If you can be imprisoned without due process, the other
Speaker 1: rights granted to people in America go out the window.
Speaker 1: So even if habeas corpus you have the body sounds archaic,
Speaker 1: it's actually quite important, perhaps especially today. Today's episode is
Speaker 1: based on the article why is habeas corpus important? On
Speaker 1: how stuffworks dot com written by Josh Clark. Brain Stuff
Speaker 1: is a production of iHeartRadio in partnership with how stuffworks
Speaker 1: dot Com, and it's produced by Tyler Klang. For more
Speaker 1: podcasts my Heart Radio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts,
Speaker 1: or whereever you listen to your favorite shows. M