Only Congress has the authority to suspend habeas corpus in an emergency.
Posted by The Briefing with Jen Psaki, Checked
- Sources
- 4 support2 context
- Said
- 1 time·
- Confidence
- 80%
The Briefing with Jen PsakiSep 24, 2026
Multiple sources state that only Congress can suspend habeas corpus, including a primary Cornell Law text, a Fordham law review, and the Brennan Center, and the claim's "in an emergency" wording tracks the Suspension Clause's rebellion-or-invasion condition.
What was said
… They're missing the fact that we don't have a martial law provision in the Constitution of the United States of America. Nobody can impose martial law. Only Congress can even suspend habeas corpus in an actual emergency, but there's no emergency. The emergency is that his political numbers are in a free fall, and he is going to suffer a massive, decisive electoral repudiation, as even Republicans are now defecting. At this point, that's what their emergency is. …
The Briefing with Jen Psaki · · from the transcriptPost →What we found
Supports. Cornell LII's primary-source overview states that only Congress has the power to suspend the writ of habeas corpus, and that the Executive does not have independent authority to do so.[1]
Supports. A Fordham law review symposium piece reports that the prevailing view, largely supported by historical practice, is that Congress alone holds the power to suspend the writ.[2]
Supports. A Georgetown Center for the Constitution page cites scholarship arguing that the Framers intended Congress alone to hold the power to suspend habeas corpus.[3]
Supports. A Scharf memo report states that courts have almost uniformly held that suspension of habeas corpus requires Congressional action.[5]
Context. The Library of Congress Constitution Annotated notes that the Suspension Clause itself does not specify which body suspends the writ, and that this has been a matter of debate, though the authority it cites is limited.[4]
Context. Lincoln suspended habeas corpus unilaterally in 1861, and Ex parte Merryman held that action illegal, after which Congress authorized the suspension; this historical exception does not establish presidential authority.[5][6]
Sources
6 sources: 4 primary, 1 tier 2, 1 not rated
- 1habeas corpuslaw.cornell.edu · primary source · cited for: supports
- 2Novel Perspectives on Due Process Symposium: Uncoupling Habeas Corpus and Due Processir.lawnet.fordham.edu · primary source · cited for: supports
- 3Suspension of Habeas Corpuslaw.georgetown.edu · primary source · cited for: supports
- 4Suspension Clause and Writ of Habeas Corpus | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congressconstitution.congress.gov · primary source · cited for: context
- 5Read Will Scharf's Confidential Habeas Corpus Memonytimes.com · tier 2 · cited for: supports, context
- 6The Astonishing Threat to Suspend Habeas Corpus | The New Yorkernewyorker.com · not rated · cited for: context
Where this claim was made
Said in 1 published post