green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 10×
62.1 score
G Cite
cited 14× by 9 distinct cases, 1938–2021 · 5 courts ·
…the constitution of the united states is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances.
at p. 120
⚠ not in text
cited 4× by 3 distinct cases, last quoted 2008 · 2 courts ·
…give recognition and protection to terrorist groups
at p. 130
⚠ not in text
Topic ↗
cited 4× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 1998 ·
…that remedy which the law affords him
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1900 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1900
1963
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Robin Roebuck v. Mayo Clinic
no doctrine, involving more pernicious consequences, was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Adams & Boyle, P.C. v. Herbert Slatery III
the constitution of the united states is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Adams & Boyle, P.C. v. Herbert Slatery III
the constitution of the united states is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
United States v. Ali
(6×)
also: Cited as authority (rule), Cited "see", Cited "see, e.g."
every one connected with the military . . . is amenable to the jurisdiction which congress has created for their government, and, while thus serving, surrenders his right to be tried by the civil courts.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Legality of the Use of Military Commissions to Try Terrorists
(8×)
also: Cited as authority (rule), Cited "see", Cited "see, e.g."
it is the birthright of every american citizen when charged with crime, to be tried and punished according to law.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Goyette v. City of Minneapolis
the constitution of the united states is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes . . . ., at all times, and under all circumstances.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Goyette v. City of Minneapolis
the constitution of the united states is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes . . . ., at all times, and under all circumstances.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
State of Washington v. Donald J. Trump
the constitution of the united states is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace ... under all circumstances.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Hamdan v. Rumsfeld
(5×)
also: Cited as authority (rule), Cited "see"
certainly no part of the judicial power of the country was conferred on military commissions
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Weiss
congress has declared the kinds of trial for offenses by soldiers and the manner in which they shall be conducted____
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Application of financialright claims GmbH v.
Instead, courts have traditionally assumed that (barring contrary evidence) Congress intended the term to cover only proceedings that are both sufficiently formal and sufficiently independent from any related litigation. 7 Likewise, courts have long expressed hesitancy before applying that term to requests for purely discretionary judicial intervention. 8 This reflects the reality that the 7 See First Nat’l Bank v. Turnbull & Co., 83 U.S. 190 , 194–95 (1872) (questioning, where an enforcement action did not require process, pleas, or written response, whether “so informal a proceeding”…
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
State of Oregon v. Trump
See, e.g., Martin, 25 U.S. at 28 (seeking a remedy at law); Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2, 107 (1866) (seeking habeas relief).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
J.G.G. v. Donald Trump
Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2, 120-121 (1866).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Jeffrey Hout v. State of Alaska, Office of the Governor, and Governor Mike Dunleavy, in an Official Capacity
If this were the case, it is hard to imagine that any indicted defendant would ‘consent’ to any proceedings against him, and the entire federal criminal code would be pointless” (footnotes omitted)). 8 See, e.g., Trump v. Vance, 140 S. Ct. 2412, 2432 (2020) (Kavanaugh, J., concurring) (“In our system of government, as this Court has often stated, no one is above the law.”); Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2, 30 (1866) (“Our system knows no authority beyond or above the law.”); cf. Aspen Expl.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
In the Matter of Troy S. Poe Trust v. the State of Texas
The Credit Bureau Court also cited the 11 United States Supreme Court’s opinion in Ex parte Milligan, in which the Court quoted from the Webster Dictionary in effect in 1866, which defined the term “cause” as “[a] suit or action in court; any legal process which a party institutes to obtain his demand, or by which he seeks his right, or supposed right,” and further stated that “[i]n any legal sense, action, suit, and cause, are convertible terms.” 71 U.S. 2, 112 (1866).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Anderson
(2×)
In Ex parte Milligan, the Supreme Court explained “the right of trial by jury . . . is preserved to every one accused of [a] crime who is not at- tached to the army, or navy, or militia in actual service.” 71 U.S. 2, 123 (1866). 1 Later, in Ex parte Quirin, the Su- preme Court reiterated that “ ‘cases arising in the land or naval forces’ are . . . . deemed excepted by implication from the Sixth [Amendment].” 317 U.S. 1 , 40 (1942); see also Whelchel v. McDonald, 340 U.S. 122, 127 (1950) (“The right to trial by jury guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment is not applicable to trials by …
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Steven Larrabee v. Carlos Del Toro
Cf. Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2, 138 (1866) (Chase, C.J., concurring) (observing that the Grand Jury Clause’s “exception [has] the same import and effect as if the powers of Congress in relation to the government of the army and navy and the militia had been 17 We note that even if some type of service connection were required when the government seeks to court-martial an inactive-duty servicemember, Larrabee was still properly subject to court-martial jurisdiction.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
in the Matter of Troy S. Poe Trust
At that time, “action,” 13 “suit,” and “cause” were treated as “convertible terms,” meaning “any legal process which a party institutes to obtain his demand or by which he seeks his right.” Id. (citing Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2, 112 (1866)); see Tolle v. Tolle, 104 S.W. 1049, 1050 (Tex. 1907); see also In re Abbott, 628 S.W.3d 288 , 293 (Tex. 2021) (“Our goal when interpreting the Texas Constitution is to give effect to the plain meaning of the text as it was understood by those who ratified it.”).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Causey
VI (emphasis added). 69 Ramos,___ U.S. at ___, 140 S. Ct. at 1396–97 (“In all, this Court has commented on the Sixth Amendment’s unanimity requirement no fewer than 13 times over more than 120 years.”) (citations omitted). 70 Id. at 1394. 17 United States v. Causey, NMCCA No. 202000228 Opinion of the Court Court has repeatedly held, the Constitution recognizes that “the exigencies of military discipline require the existence of a special system of military courts in which not all of the specific procedural protections deemed essential in Ar- ticle III trials need apply.” 71 The Cou…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Westcott
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
Thus, Whelchel appears to lay to rest any ques- tion that the Court’s rulings in Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2, 123 (1866), or Quirin, only referred to military commissions or commission cases. 57 United States v. Westcott, No. ACM 39936 Our superior court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF), has consistently abided by the precedent set forth by the Su- preme Court that the Sixth Amendment right to trial by jury does not apply to courts-martial.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
E.A.C., A CHILD v. STATE OF FLORIDA
“The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances.” Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2, 120-21 (1866).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
BAYLEY'S CAMPGROUND INC v. MILLS
“The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances.” Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2, 107 (1866).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Wisconsin Legislature v. Andrea Palm
Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism, but the theory of necessity on which it is based is false; for the government, within the Constitution, has all the powers granted to it, which are necessary to preserve its existence; as has been happily proved by the result of the great effort to throw off its just authority." Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2, 120-21 (1866) (emphasis added).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Wisconsin Legislature v. Andrea Palm
Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism, but the theory of necessity on which it is based is false; for the government, within the Constitution, has all the powers granted to it, which are necessary to preserve its existence; as has been happily proved by the result of the great effort to throw off its just authority." Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2, 120-21 (1866) (emphasis added).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Begani
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
The stated purpose of the Fleet Reserve is to “provide an available source of experienced former members of the Regular Navy or Navy Reserve.” 68 64 Dunn v. Blumstein, 405 U.S. 330, 342 (1972) (emphasis in original) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted) (Tennessee durational residence laws for voting infringed on fundamental right) (citations omitted). 65 Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. at 123. (“[T]he framers of the Constitution, doubt- less, meant to limit the right of trial by jury, in the sixth amendment, to those per- sons who were subject to indictment or presentment in the f…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Ortiz v. United States
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
Although Milligan con- firmed the general rule that “it is the birthright of every American citizen” to have the Federal Government adjudi- cate criminal charges against him only in an Article III court, 4 Wall., at 119, 122, we also stated that “[e]very one Cite as: 585 U. S. ____ (2018) 21 ALITO, J., dissenting connected with” “the military or naval service . . . while thus serving, surrenders his right to be tried by the civil courts,” id., at 123 .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Ortiz v. United States
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
Although Milligan con- firmed the general rule that “it is the birthright of every American citizen” to have the Federal Government adjudi- cate criminal charges against him only in an Article III court, 4 Wall., at 119, 122, we also stated that “[e]very one Cite as: 585 U. S. ____ (2018) 21 ALITO, J., dissenting connected with” “the military or naval service . . . while thus serving, surrenders his right to be tried by the civil courts,” id., at 123 .
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Jihad Dhiab v. Donald J. Trump
Ex Parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2, 5 (1866)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
In re Pension Reform Litigation
Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism ***.” (Emphasis in original.) Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2, 120-21 (1866). ¶ 87 The financial challenges facing state and local governments in Illinois are well known and significant.
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Ali Hamza Ahmad al Bahlul v. United States
(10×)
also: Cited "see"
The Quirin Court also observed, consistent with Chief Justice Chase’s words nearly a century earlier, Milligan, 71 U.S. at 142 (Chase, C.J., concurring in judgment), that “[a]n important incident to the conduct of war is the adoption of measures by the military command ... to seize and subject to disciplinary measures those enemies who in their attempt to thwart or impede our military effort have violated the law of war.” Quirin, 317 U.S. at 28-29 , 63 S.Ct. 2 (emphasis added).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
In re Pension Reform Litigation
Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism ***.” (Emphasis in original.) Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2, 120-21 (1866). ¶ 87 The financial challenges facing state and local governments in Illinois are well known and significant.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Hedges v. Obama
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
The Court stated, “No book can be found in any library to justify the assertion that military tribunals may try a citizen at a place where the courts are open.” Id. at 73.
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Al Bahlul
(10×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
Although appellant alleges that the M.C.A. substituted a legislative for a judicial determination of guilt, nothing in his arguments "suggest that Congress was intent on encroaching on the judicial function of punishing an individual for blameworthy offenses." Nixon, 433 U.S. at 479 , 97 S.Ct. 2777 . [140] Though more recent cases analyze whether punishment was administered without a judicial trial, historically, the inquiry and concern was whether the legislative enactment created "the deprivation without any of the ordinary forms and guards provided for the security of the citizen in the adm…
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Al-Marri v. Pucciarelli
(20×)
also: Cited "see"
The Government alleged that Milligan had communicated with the enemy, had conspired to “seize munitions of war,” and had “join[ed] and aid[ed] ... a secret” enemy organization “for the purpose of overthrowing the Government and duly constituted authorities of the United States.” Id. at 6.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Boumediene v. Bush
Cf. Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall., at 127 (“If, in foreign invasion or civil war, the courts are actually closed, and it is impossible to administer criminal justice according to law, then, on the theatre of active military operations, where war really prevails, there is a necessity to furnish a substitute for the civil authority, thus overthrown, to preserve the safety of the army and society; and as no power is left but the military, it is allowed to govern by martial rule until the laws can have their free course”).
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Al-Marri v. Wright
(16×)
also: Cited "see"
The Government alleged that Milligan had communicated with the enemy, had conspired to “seize munitions of war,” and had “join[ed] and overthrowing the Government and duly constituted authorities of the United States.” Id. at 6.
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Al-Marri v. Wright, Usn
(6×)
also: Cited "see"
The Government alleged that Milligan had communicated with the enemy, had conspired to "seize munitions of war," and had "join[ed] and overthrowing the Government and duly constituted authorities of the United States." Id. at 6.
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Hamdi v. Rumsfeld
(32×)
also: Cited "see", Cited "see, e.g."
Id., at 118, 131.
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Padilla v. Rumsfeld
(3×)
However, it also limited his power to detain indefinitely "citizens of States in which the administration of the laws had continued unimpaired in the Federal courts, who were then held, or might thereafter be held, as prisoners of the United States, under the authority of the President, otherwise than as prisoners of war." Id. at 5. 77 This limitation was embodied in a requirement that the Executive furnish a list of such prisoners to the district and circuit courts and, upon request by a prisoner, release him if the grand jury failed to return an indictment.
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Padilla v. Rumsfeld
(3×)
However, it also limited his power to detain indefinitely “citizens of States in which the administration of the laws had continued unimpaired in the Federal courts, who were then held, or might thereafter be held, as prisoners of the United States, under the authority of the President, otherwise than as prisoners of war.” Id. at 5.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Mudd v. Caldera
In rejecting the notion that law of war jurisdiction can never be applied to “citizens in states which have upheld the authority of the government, and where the courts are open and their process unobstructed,” Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. at 121, 4 Wall. 2 , the Supreme Court in Quirin said: “We construe the Court’s statement [in Milligan ] as to the inapplicability of the law of war to Milligan’s case as having particular reference to the facts before it.” Ex parte Quirin, 317 U.S. at 45 , 63 S.Ct. 2 .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Mudd v. Caldera
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
Ex Parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 2, 71 U.S. 2, 118-19, 126 , 18 L.Ed. 281 (1866).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Smith
(2×)
Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism, but the theory of necessity on which it is based is false; for the government, within the Constitution, has all the powers granted to it, which are necessary to preserve its existence; as has been happily proved by the result of the great effort to throw off its just authority.” (Emphasis added.) Id. at 120-121.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Solorio v. United States
(2×)
Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 2, 123 (1867).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Gay
See Rostker v. Goldberg, supra, 453 U.S. at 64-65, 68, 71 , 101 S.Ct. at 2651-2652, 2653, 2654 , 69 L.Ed.2d at 486, 488, 490 ; Brown v. Glines, supra, 444 U.S. at 353 , 100 S.Ct. at 598-599 , 62 L.Ed.2d at 546-547 ; Middendorf v. Henry, supra, 425 U.S. at 43, 96 S.Ct. at 1291 , 47 L.Ed.2d at 569 ; id. at 49-51 , 96 S.Ct. at 1294-1295, 47 L.Ed.2d at 572-573 (Powell, J., concurring); Greer v. Spock, supra, 424 U.S. at 837, 840 , 96 S.Ct. at 1217, 1218 , 47 L.Ed.2d at 514, 515 ; Schlesinger v. Councilman, supra, 420 U.S. at 746 , 95 S.Ct. at 1307 , 43 L.Ed.2d at 602 ; Schlesinger v. Ballard, 419 …
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Jones
Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 2, 124-127, 18 L.Ed. 281 (U.S.1866); Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee, 1 Wheat. 304 , 4 L.Ed. 97 (U.S.1816).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Tiede
See Ex parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1, 40, 43-45 , 63 S.Ct. 2 , 87 L.Ed. 3 ; Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 2, 123, 138 , 18 L.Ed. 281 . 343 U.S. at 360 n. 26, 72 S.Ct. at 710 .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Krause v. Rhodes
At a later point in its opinion, the Supreme Court further assailed the defendants’ assertion that their action under a proclamation of martial law “can be taken as conclusive proof of its own necessity and must be accepted as in itself due process of law”: “Appellants' contentions find their appropriate answer in what was said by this Court in Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 2, 124 [ 18 L.Ed. 281 ], a statement as applicable to the military authority of the state in the case of insurrection as to the military authority of the nation in time of war: ‘The proposition is this: That in a tim…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Arthur Krause, Administrator of the Estate of Allison Krause, Deceased v. James Rhodes, Governor of the State of Ohio, Elaine B. Miller, Administratrix of the Estate of Jeffrey Glenn Miller, Deceased v. James Rhodes, Individually and as Governor of the State of Ohio, Sarah Scheuer, Administratrix of the Estate of Sandra Lee Scheuer, Deceased v. James Rhodes, Governor of the State of Ohio
III, Sec. 2), and, so extending, the court has all the authority appropriate to its exercise." 287 U.S. at 397-398 , 53 S.Ct. at 195 . 199 At a later point in its opinion, the Supreme Court further assailed the defendants' assertion that their action under a proclamation of martial law "can be taken as conclusive proof of its own necessity and must be accepted as in itself due process of law": 200 "Appellants' contentions find their appropriate answer in what was said by this Court in Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 2, 124 [ 18 L.Ed. 281 ], a statement as applicable to the military authority of the…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Parisi v. Davidson
(2×)
Civil liberty and the military regime have an "antagonism" that is "irreconcilable." Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall., at 124, 125 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Brobst Et Al.
v.
Brobst
v.
Brobst
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 22, 1867.
Messrs. Brent and Merrick
Cited by 5 opinions | Published
Citer courts: D. Minnesota (2) · Ninth Circuit (1) · United States Court of Militar… (1) · Supreme Court (1)
The CHIEF JUSTICE:
Tbe question is one of fact, and can only be determined by an examination of tbe evidence in tbe record; and it has been repeatedly determined that only questions of law upon distinct points in a cause can be brought to this court by certificate. *
An order must be made, therefore, remanding this cause to the Circuit Court, without answer to tbe question certified, for want of jurisdiction.
*
Wilson v. Barnum, 8 Howard, 261.