Post Reply 
The Flimsy Case Against Mary Surratt
01-13-2019, 05:57 PM (This post was last modified: 01-13-2019 06:00 PM by wpbinzel.)
Post: #25
RE: The Flimsy Case Against Mary Surratt
(01-13-2019 04:48 PM)mike86002000 Wrote:  
(01-13-2019 03:59 PM)wpbinzel Wrote:  Hello, Another Mike. Welcome to the forum.

I know a little bit about the law and Ex Parte Milligan. See the March 2018 issue of the Columbia Law Review.

No court of competent jurisdiction has ever ruled that the trial of the Lincoln assassination conspirators was "illegal," even in the aftermath of Milligan. Judge Thomas Jefferson Boynton of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida considered that very issue in Ex Parte Mudd, 17 F. Cas. 954 (S.D. Fla. 1868) two years after Milligan. Judge Boynton specifically ruled that Milligan was not on point and was not applicable to the Lincoln assassination conspirators. That decision has never been overruled. In fact, a portion of the decision was cited as good law by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in 2016 in a ruling authored by now-Justice Brett Kavanaugh. See Al Bahlul v. United States, 840 F.3d 757 (2016).

The exercise to apply 21st Century legal theory to a 19th Century case is very problematic. At best, it is highly speculative and a matter of conjecture, and should be labeled as such, and not as fact. Reasonable people can and do have different opinions on the issue, including folks whom I hold in high regard. But just because it is your opinion, does not make it a fact.

Does the ruling of a District Court Judge overrule a finding of the Supreme Court?

The Only fact I intended to assert is that the Supreme Court Ruled in Ex Parte Milligan that the military had no jurisdiction in the trial and sentencing of civilians if civilian courts were available. This is a fact, not merely my opinion.

Mike

It is not a question of one court "overruling" another; it is a question of whether a decision of the Supreme Court is "on point"; i.e., whether the facts of a subsequent case fall within the Court's ruling. In this instance, a federal judge ruled that Milligan was not on point and, therefore, not applicable to the Lincoln assassination conspirators. That decision has never been overruled and, consequently, still stands.

Your correctly summarize the holding of the Court in Milligan. Where you are incorrect is the relevance and application of that ruling to the conspirators. The "fact" is that the only court of competent jurisdiction to consider the matter said that Milligan was not relevant or applicable to the Lincoln assassination conspirators. You certainly may disagree with Judge Boynton's ruling, but that is a matter of your opinion, and your opinion does not make it a fact.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Messages In This Thread
RE: The Flimsy Case Against Mary Surratt - wpbinzel - 01-13-2019 05:57 PM

Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 16 Guest(s)