Of the Anglo-Saxon heritages, the debate over the writ of habeas corpus has endured extensive manipulation throughout American history. Controversial since its ratification, the “Great Writ” is a written disposition by a common-law court to require the establishment of the legal and jurisdictional basis for detaining a prisoner. The court then mandates the release or continued incarceration of a prisoner pending the results of this evidence. Though the founding generation was well aware that the Habeas Corpus Clause lacked perfect clarity and was intended for use by future generations, the historical context from which the clause stemmed may aid in illustrating the Framers’ scope and meaning.
As described in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2 of the Constitution, “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall
…show more content…
Though the origin of the writ is not known, most scholars believe the notion of habeas corpus initially developed with the Magna Carta in thirteenth century England. King John was forced to find the Magna Carta valid and grant the charter of liberties to the elite classes, meanwhile instituting a rule of law not only for himself but future sovereigns of England as well. As feudalism disappeared and the Magna Carta adapted, the seventeenth century Magna Carta was predominated by the constitutionalism and jurisprudence that Americans and Englishmen alike know in modern times. “Before the seventeenth century was out, two other great charters of liberty—the Habeas Corpus Act of 1679 and the Bill of Rights of 1689—secured such rights as habeas corpus, petition for redress of grievances, free speech in Parliament, and free juries. All these steps were in the tradition of Magna Carta…” (Howard 1965, 529) . The negative connotation of the Suspension Clause as it is written in the U.S. Constitution-