I saw a few people making some posts about 71 US .2 and Section 98, went digging around. Found some very heartening info that I'll post here. In short, from an 1866 SCOTUS case, 71 US .2 Ex parte Milligan, it was ruled that the Constitution cannot be suspended entirely and that martial law shall only extend to habeas corpus, and further shall only extend for such a time until the normal courts may return to regular hearings. Additionally, it was ruled that martial law does not give the military the ability to try civilians in military courts, because the civilian courts are assumed to have the ability to return to normal service in the future.

Very fun reading here: https://archive.md/O8v8f

They also cite American Jurisprudence 2d, section 98.

Something that caught my eye that may be a good read for many people on here is the ruling from Ex parte Milligan, seeing as it's never been overturned. I'll put a few excerpts, but also the link. The case ends and the Official Ruling is delivered in sections 426-493. The Dissenting Opinion begins in Section 494. https://m.openjurist.org/71/us/2

But Section 473 is where things get really interesting.

All other persons, citizens of states where the courts are open, if charged with crime, are guaranteed the inestimable privilege of trial by jury.

The ruling specifically disregards that the courts be ignored or denied their jobs when "the passions of men are aroused" or "the restraints of law are weakened".

Section 476 goes on to speak about what a country governed by unrestricted Martial Law would entail, and why it's restricted so that Commanders and Presidents cannot impede and punish citizens at will.

Martial law, established on such a basis, destroys every guarantee of the Constitution, and effectually renders the 'military independent of and superior to the civil power'—the attempt to do which by the King of Great Britain was deemed by our fathers such an offence, that they assigned it to the world as one of the causes which impelled them to declare their independence.

In Section 477, they speak to the fact that the Founders knew that we would see war, and furthermore they knew that evil men may indeed gain access to the powers delegated to the government.

For this, and other equally weighty reasons, they secured the inheritance they had fought to maintain, by incorporating in a written constitution the safeguards which time had proved were essential to its preservation. Not one of these safeguards can the President, or Congress, or the Judiciary disturb, except the one concerning the writ of habeas corpus.

In Section 478, they defend why the government has the ability to detain/arrest dangerous people without the writ of habeas corpus under martial law.

Knowing this, they limited the suspension to one great right, and left the rest to remain forever inviolable. But, it is insisted that the safety of the country in time of war demands that this broad claim for martial law shall be sustained.

But 479 is the real kicker, here.

Martial law cannot arise from a threatened invasion. The necessity must be actual and present; the invasion real, such as effectually closes the courts and deposes the civil administration.

Martial law cannot be declared from a threatened invasion. The courts and civil administration must be closed for martial laws to be engaged.

There's a ton of incredible stuff in this never overturned ruling, but that is the big boom. That was the keeper. The first question of this case was whether Martial Law could apply to Milligan in a time of peace, and this never overturned ruling declared that Martial Law may never apply while the civilian courts are open.

So, the reason for this dig, i think a lot of you may have figured out:

1. Why did [they] want to close the country so badly? Who were the targets then?

2. How many times and how many people have violated this case's precedent?

3. Head back to that first article, American Jurisprudence. Anyone who ever supported, aided, voted for, engaged with, comforted, or otherwise enabled this ruling to be broken engaged in war against the US, her Constitution, and her People. This includes Congress, the Judiciary, and even the Executive. What if every court had engaged in this behavior before? Including the FISA courts? Would they all have to close? Where would you try the cases? What precedent would make it legal?

This one. Enjoy the show.