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. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 12 months |
This level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Dubious claim - United States
[edit]The claim made in the United States section (shown below) makes claims I cannot verify and in modern times appears to be unrealistic.
When the original thirteen American colonies declared independence, and became a republic based on popular sovereignty, any person, in the name of the people, acquired authority to initiate such writs.
The main article points out, at length, the difference between the implementations of writs in the US and England. Such differences however only allow for a person to petition a court for a writ of habeas corpus if they are a federal prisoner and meet the criteria set out here. It would seem more appropriate the text reflect the realities presented in the main article which provides a much stricter definition for who may petition for a writ. Generically Named (talk) 14:35, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- B-Class level-5 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-5 vital articles in Society and social sciences
- B-Class vital articles in Society and social sciences
- B-Class Human rights articles
- High-importance Human rights articles
- WikiProject Human rights articles
- B-Class law articles
- High-importance law articles
- WikiProject Law articles
- B-Class Philosophy articles
- Mid-importance Philosophy articles
- B-Class social and political philosophy articles
- Mid-importance social and political philosophy articles
- Social and political philosophy task force articles
- B-Class Latin articles
- Low-importance Latin articles