Ex parte Milligan

71 U.S. 2 | 1866

Facts:
In 1864, Lambden P. Milligan, a civilian resident of Indiana, was arrested by the military
on charges of inciting insurrection and giving aid and comfort to the Confederacy. After being
tried and convicted by a military court, Milligan was sentenced to death. In 1865, he petitioned
the federal circuit court for a writ of habeas corpus, arguing that the military did not have
jurisdiction over him since, at the time of his arrest, he was a civilian living in a state where the
civilian courts were still open and that, even if the military court had jurisdiction, it had violated
his right to trial by jury. The circuit court was unable to reach a decision on these issues and thus
certified the case to the Supreme Court. After the Supreme Courts decision, Milligan was
released from custody. He later prevailed in a civil action against the military commander who
had ordered his arrest.

Issue:
WoN the military court has the jurisdiction to try Milligan?

Held:
The Court held that the military commission did not have jurisdiction to try Milligan here, as he
was a citizen in a state where the courts remained open and their process unobstructed. The Court
also found that Milligans Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial had been violated.
Writing for the majority, Justice Davis first addressed the threshold jurisdictional issue of
whether, under the Judiciary Act of 1802, the Court had authority to entertain Milligans habeas
petition. The parties admitted that section fourteen of the Judiciary Act of 1789 authorized the
Circuit Court to exercise habeas review; however, they disagreed about whether the certification
to the Supreme Court could occur without a final decision from the Circuit Court. Reasoning that
if jurisdiction was lacking whenever a circuit court divided on the question of legality of a
detainees imprisonment, then a prisoner would be left remediless, which was a result Congress
could not have intended in enacting the Act of 1802. Milligans petition for a writ of habeas was
the only remedy that the law afforded him, and the Court felt that he should not suffer because the
circuit judges were unable to render a judgment. The Court therefore held that it had jurisdiction
to consider Milligans habeas petition.
The Court then addressed the key issue in the case: whether the military commission had
jurisdiction to try Milligan. As the Court explained, Milligan was not a resident of one of the
rebellious states, nor a prisoner of war. He had never served in the military. Yet he was
arrested, tried, and sentenced to death by a commission instituted by the military. The Court
opined, No graver question was ever considered by this court . . . for it is the birthright of every
American citizen when charged with crimes, to be tried and punished according to law. The
law, the Constitution, the Court explained, applies equally in war and peace and covers with the
shield of protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances.
Based upon such principles, the Court held that the application of the military commission to
Milligan was unconstitutional. First, the Constitution expressly vests judicial power in one
supreme court and such inferior courts as Congress may establish. The military commission was
established by order of the President, not Congress. And although the argument was made that
the President was vested with such authority under the laws and usages of war, the Court
declared that such authority can never be applied to citizens in non-rebellious states where the
civilian courts remain open. Civilian law provided for the arrest, punishment, and sentencing of
Milligan; thus, the military commission was without legal authority. The Court also found that
Milligan had been denied his Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial, which the Court described as
one of the most valuable [rights] in a free country.