Talk:Habeas corpus

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Habeas corpus article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 30 days

This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Human rights High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Correction and Detention Facilities (defunct) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Correction and Detention Facilities, a project which is currently considered to be defunct. Law High‑importance Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Philosophy: Social and political Mid‑importance Philosophy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Social and political philosophy Latin Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Latin on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Habeas corpus and the Royal writ

Please see Writs#History (also xref'd in the article) where an explanation similar to that of Churchill is given. Regarding Fair use I have used ellipses to save space, but the brief sections quoted, (each about 1 1/2 sentences long) could be broken down into three even smaller fragments if that is desirable.

British Anti-Terror laws

I'm no fan of the abolition of habeas corpus (as it's about to be done in Aus), but the section on British anti-terrorist legislation is definitely not NPOV. It should be rephrased, but if I do it, the section would be a one-liner.

Cognate

Wouldn't "habeas" be a cognate with "haber", Spanish for "to have (verb)". Also, "corpus" sounds like "corpse".

Manifest Destiny problem

It seems to me that the article's statement that habeas corpus is / has been interpreted as being associated with Manifest Destiny should be cited, and if there is evidence for this claim, moved to a different section of the article; i.e., from Derivation to History.

More pressing is the subjective conjecture that: "In this sense habeas corpus justified American involvement in the Vietman War and the merciful killing of African-Americans along the coast of Ghana." There is no mention of Ghana in the Manifest Destiny article (nor Eisenhower's), nor any indication that this is an unbiased and factual description. Is the word "merciful" racist or ironic; I can't tell.

This article - A question of freedom: - seems to describe what the statement is alluding to, but shows a more believable portrayal of Ghana's independence being a political rallying point in the US, vis-a-vis the claim that African-Americans were killed along the coast of Ghana, which is obviously contentious, if not patently false.

I don't know what to do about this, other than deletion, but it seriously detracts from the article's quality.