Rather than just define the words "Habeas Corpus"
I attached what has become a POV reference to those words, and my research
confirms how the partisan nature of it inputs as to what the courts can do to
impact then way "Habeas Corpus" is applied.
Law School scholarly articles I found each discuss the
theory of how a partisan application can result in a Judge's POV judicial
decision, offering certain case law examples that were impacted, which are
interesting determinations of case law and Habeas Corpus, and indicate how
partisan Judges can be.
The Wikipedia article discusses the history of "Habeas
Corpus" and court decisions that were impactful to the consideration of
legal cases brought before the courts.
The merriam-webster online dictionary defines the words
Habeas Corpus without bias, but offers an example of the words in a sentence
that refers to the Vermont state judge freeing of a Green card holder who was
about to be deported for participation and planning of protests the
Executive branch has determined are not
in the best interests of our nation (as noted below re the May 15 SCOTUS) and is
as has been discussed in the April blogspot post, a departure
from the usual apolitical nature of online dictionary websites.
However, now in 2025, the partisan nature of "Habeas
Corpus" will again be redetermined on May 15, when SCOTUS is scheduled to
meet and determine whether the lower courts or even state courts can override
the prerogative of the Executive branch of our Republic, and in fact issue
nation-wide judicial injunctions to insure that "Habeas Corpus" is
fully granted to the holders of Green cards, even to preventing deportation,
despite the determination of the Executive branch that the individual is
fermenting against the Executive branches' foreign policy, as well as causing
domestic violence contrary to the laws that protect others' civil rights.
