Obrázky stránek
PDF
ePub
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

SS 161-168.

154, 602

Shipping Act, 1916, § 9.... 395

Suits in Admiralty Act.

Trading with the Enemy Act,
§§ 2, 7....

U. S. Employees Compensa

222

395, 575

575

69

tion Act

575

Walsh-Healey Public Con

154

tracts Act, §§ 1-6.... 501

(B) STATUTES OF THE STATES AND TERRITORIES.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

CASES ADJUDGED

IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

NOS.

AT

JULY SPECIAL TERM, 1942.

EX PARTE QUIRIN ET AL.1

ORIGINAL. MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO FILE PETITIONS
FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS

AND

UNITED STATES EX REL. QUIRIN ET AL. v. COX, PROVOST MARSHAL.2

NOS. 1-7.

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

Argued July 29-30, 1942.-Decided July 31, 1942.

Per Curiam decision filed, July 31, 1942.3 Full Opinion filed, October

[blocks in formation]

1. A federal court may refuse to issue a writ of habeas corpus where the facts alleged in the petition, if proved, would not warrant discharge of the prisoner. P. 24.

'No., Original, Ex parte Richard Quirin; No. —, Original, Ex parte Herbert Hans Haupt; No. -, Original, Ex parte Edward John Kerling; No., Original, Ex parte Ernest Peter Burger; No. —, Original, Ex parte Heinrich Harm Heinck; No. - Original, Ex parte Werner Thiel; and No. —, Original, Ex parte Hermann Otto Neubauer.

No. 1, United States ex rel. Quirin v. Cox, Provost Marshal; No. 2, United States ex rel. Haupt v. Cox, Provost Marshal; No. 3, United States ex rel. Kerling v. Cox, Provost Marshal; No. 4, United States ex rel. Burger v. Cox, Provost Marshal; No. 5, United States ex rel. Heinck v. Cox, Provost Marshal; No. 6, United States ex rel. Thiel v. Cox, Provost Marshal; and No. 7, United States ex rel. Neubauer v. Cox, Provost Marshal.

See footnote, post, p. 18.

Post, p. 18.

503873-43

-8

1

[blocks in formation]

2. Presentation to the District Court of the United States for the District of Columbia of a petition for habeas corpus was the institution of a suit; and denial by that court of leave to file the petition was a judicial determination of a case or controversy reviewable by appeal to the U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia and in this Court by certiorari. P. 24.

3. The President's Proclamation of July 2, 1942, declaring that all persons who are citizens or subjects of, or who act under the direction of, any nation at war with the United States, and who during time of war enter the United States through coastal or boundary defenses, and are charged with committing or attempting to commit sabotage, espionage, hostile acts, or violations of the law of war, "shall be subject to the law of war and to the jurisdiction of military tribunals," does not bar accused persons from access to the civil courts for the purpose of determining the applicability of the Proclamation to the particular case; nor does the Proclamation, which in terms denied to such persons access to the courts, nor the enemy alienage of the accused, foreclose consideration by the civil courts of the contention that the Constitution and laws of the United States forbid their trial by military commission. P. 24. 4. In time of war between the United States and' Germany, petitioners, wearing German military uniforms and carrying explosives, fuses, and incendiary and time devices, were landed from German submarines in the hours of darkness, at places on the Eastern seaboard of the United States. Thereupon they buried the uniforms and supplies, and proceeded, in civilian dress, to various places in the United States. All had received instructions in Germany from an officer of the German High Command to destroy war industries and war facilities in the United States, for which they or their relatives in Germany were to receive salary payments from the German Government. They also had been paid by the German Government during their course of training at a sabotage school, and had with them, when arrested, substantial amounts of United States currency, which had been handed to them by an officer of the German High Command, who had instructed them to wear their German uniforms while landing in the United States. Specification 1 of the charges on which they were placed on trial before a military commission charged that they, "being enemies of the United States and acting for... the German Reich, a belligerent enemy nation, secretly and covertly passed, in civilian dress, contrary to the law of war, through the military and naval lines and defenses of the United

« PředchozíPokračovat »