More on Merryman

Allen C. Guelzo, Restoring the Proclamation: Abraham Lincoln, Confiscation, and Emancipation in the Civil War Era, 50 How. L.J. 397, 410 (2007) (“Lincoln had already defied one attempt at Supreme Court meddling in 1861 in Ex parte Merryman . . . .”), <https://cupola.gettysburg.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?httpsredir=1&article=1039&context=cwfac>; 

Allen C. Guelzo, Fateful Lightning: A New History of the Civil War and Reconstruction 278 (2012) (characterizing Merryman as being decided by Taney in consequence of his oversight over the “Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals”);

Allen C. Guelzo, Special Report, SR100, Abraham Lincoln or the Progressives: Who was the real father of big government?, Heritage Foundation 12 (2012) (characterizing Merryman as issued by TANEY as “presiding judge for the U.S. Fifth Circuit”); id. (describing Taney as issuing “a writ for Merryman’s release to his court”), <https://static.heritage.org/2012/pdf/SR100.pdf>

Allen C. Guelzo, Reconstruction: A Concise History 86 (2018) (characterizing Taney as having issued Merryman as a “circuit judge”);

Allen Guelzo, Ex parte Merryman (1861), Constituting America (circa 2018) (last accessed Dec. 29, 2022), <https://tinyurl.com/yvzcrjev>, <https://tinyurl.com/4rwe6t9h>; also reported at: Allen Guelzo, Essay 61—Ex Parte Merryman (1861), <https://soundcloud.com/constituting-america/essay-61-ex-parte-merryman-1861-by-allen-guelzo> (at 5:35ff) (circa 2018) (“The technical status of the [Taney’s] comment has always been the first issue in ex parte Merryman, since Taney issued [his opinion] in his co-capacity as a federal circuit judge, but prefaced it as being issued from his U.S. Supreme Court chambers as though it were the product of a full hearing before the Supreme Court.”).

Allen C. Guelzo, Reconstruction: A Very Short Introduction 89 (OUP 2020) (“But Merryman was only Taney’s opinion as a circuit judge, not a full Supreme Court decision, and Abraham Lincoln simply ignored it.”), <https://tinyurl.com/yjr37fpp>;

Allen C. Guelzo, Abraham Lincoln: Redeemer President (2d ed 2022), <https://tinyurl.com/3y5k7s7f>;

Id. at Preface (“Lincoln had no intention of allowing his [Lincoln’s] decision to suspend the writ of habeas corpus to be appealed to the Supreme Court.”);

Id. (Merryman’s lawyer sought out Taney “in his double capacity as federal circuit judge for Maryland”);

Id. (Taney ordering “Merryman’s jailers . . . to produce Merryman for civil trial”); [TILLMAN adding: not really a “trial”—more of a hearing] 

Id. (characterizing Taney’s substantive discussion in Merryman as “ridiculous”);

Jeffrey Rosen & Allen Guelzo, Lincoln, Democracy, and the American Experiment, National Constitution Center (April 11, 2024), <https://tinyurl.com/3wf8jxtn>, <https://tinyurl.com/44xzmhcm>. Guelzo: “Now of course, Chief Justice Taney has a fit over this, issues his own opinion in Ex Parte Merryman denouncing what Lincoln has done is unconstitutional and hoping then that Lincoln would appeal what he had written to the entire Supreme Court, in which case Taney would hope to get a full court decision striking down the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. Lincoln doesn’t appeal it.” (at page 14, at 00:57:02.7];

[END]

Seth Barrett Tillman, ‘Guelzo on Ex parte Merryman,’ New Reform Club (Feb. xx, 2026, xx:xx PM), <>;