America will never be the same if Trump suspends habeas corpus

Photo: Gerald Farinas.

When Donald Trump floats the idea of suspending habeas corpus—a foundational right in American law—it raises deep concerns about the future of democracy and due process in the United States.

I should know. My own family lived through suspension in the Philippines under President Ferdinand E. Marcos.

This isn’t just some obscure legal term from a dusty law book.

Habeas corpus is the basic right that protects people from being detained without a fair trial or explanation.

It literally means “you shall have the body,” referring to a person’s right to appear before a judge and hear the reasons for their imprisonment.

Shockingly, Trump’s Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem, doesn’t even know what habeas corpus.

According to reporting by Politico, she stated, “I’ll have to get back to you on the specifics of that term,” when asked whether the administration had a legal basis to suspend it (Politico, May 2025).

And recently before Congress… fail.

This level of ignorance at the top levels of government is not only embarrassing—it’s dangerous.

What habeas corpus protects

The writ of habeas corpus is enshrined in Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution, and it ensures that the government cannot detain a person indefinitely without showing cause before a judge.

It’s a safeguard against tyranny and a cornerstone of the American legal system.

According to the Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute, it is “a fundamental instrument for safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary and lawless state action” (LII, Cornell Law School).

Lincoln did it—but not without Congress

Trump’s defenders often cite Abraham Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus during the Civil War as precedent.

But here’s the difference!

Lincoln initially attempted to suspend it on his own in 1861, but he faced immediate legal backlash.

In Ex parte Merryman, Chief Justice Roger Taney ruled that the president did not have the authority to unilaterally suspend the writ—only Congress could do that (Ex parte Merryman, 17 F. Cas. 144, C.C.D. Md. 1861).

Lincoln eventually had to go to Congress, which passed the Habeas Corpus Suspension Act of 1863, granting him that temporary authority due to the extreme emergency of civil war (Library of Congress).

Even then, it was seen as controversial, and it came with limitations and oversight.

Why Trump can’t do it alone

Today, we are not in a civil war. Suspending habeas corpus under these conditions would be an abuse of executive power!

The Constitution makes it clear that the power to suspend habeas corpus lies with Congress—not the president.

Article I, which outlines the powers of the legislative branch, places this authority firmly in congressional hands.

Legal scholars from the Brennan Center for Justice emphasize that any attempt by a president to act unilaterally in this area “would constitute a grave violation of constitutional norms” (Brennan Center, 2024).

If Trump were allowed to proceed, it would set a precedent for authoritarian rule—where anyone can be locked up without trial, explanation, or recourse.

That’s the kind of unchecked power we see in dictatorships, not democracies.

The real risk

The real risk of Trump suspending habeas corpus is not just about one law or one right. It’s about the erosion of all democratic safeguards.

If the government can detain people without explanation, it can silence dissent, intimidate political opponents, and operate without accountability.

That’s how freedom dies—not in one dramatic moment, but in quiet, bureaucratic steps justified by fear and ignorance.

We must be vigilant.

The suspension of habeas corpus is not just a legal overreach—it is a threat to the very core of American liberty.