From the foundation of the American Republic, presidents have had to
deal with both internal and external national security threats. From
President Washington and his policy of neutrality during the wars
between Great Britain and France in the eighteenth century, to President
Lincoln and the war to save the union, to President Wilson during the
war to end all wars, to President Roosevelt and war of the Greatest
Generation, to President Truman and his steel during the forgotten war,
and most recently to President Bush and the War on Terror, presidents
have had to use their power as commander-in-chief to meet the challenges
of national crisis and war. The judiciary, specifically the Supreme
Court, has also played an integral part in the historical development
and defining of the commander-in-chief power in times of war and
national crisis from the earliest days of the republic. How these powers
have grown is a consequence of how the presidents have viewed the office
of the presidency and how the judiciary has interpreted the
commander-in-chief and executive power clauses of the U.S. Constitution
over time. Supreme Court Jurisprudence in Times of National Crisis,
Terrorism, and War provides a chronological review of the major national
security and war events in American history. Garrison reviews the great
debates between Hamilton and Madison and Chief Justice Roger Taney and
Attorney General Edward Bates on presidential executive power and how
subsequent presidents have adopted the Hamiltonian view of the
presidency. He also examines how Article III courts, specifically the
Supreme Court, have defined, expanded, and established boundaries on the
commander-in-chief power. With this historical backdrop, Garrison
reveals how, for over two centuries, the judiciary has defended the rule
of law and maintained the principle that under the U.S. Constitution
neither the guns of war nor threats to safety have silenced the rule of
law.
