Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2913390492> ?p ?o ?g. }
- W2913390492 endingPage "136" @default.
- W2913390492 startingPage "105" @default.
- W2913390492 abstract "Criminal Amnesty, State Courts, and the Reach of Reconstruction David C. Williard (bio) It will be a great public good if the past can be forgiven and forgotten, wrote Justice Edwin G. Reade from the bench of North Carolina's supreme court nearly two years after the end of the American Civil War. Reade's desire for a collective forgetting of the greatest disruption ever to face his state stood at odds with subsequent history, as conflicts about the meaning of the Civil War dominated postwar politics for years and American historical memory for decades. Yet in one critical respect, the justice and his associates on the North Carolina court succeeded in achieving precisely that oblivescence. Armed with a remarkable piece of legislation known as the North Carolina Amnesty Act of 1866, the court handed down a series of decisions whose collective juridical impact placed the Civil War beyond the reach of criminal justice in the state. As interpreted by the North Carolina court, the pardon extended to Union and Confederate soldiers, deserters fighting against military authority, the Home Guardsmen and conscription officers who pursued them, men who acted on orders from their commanders during the war, and those who sought personal vengeance in its aftermath. From 1867 to 1872, the court applied the Amnesty Act broadly, as acts of grace … to be construed liberally in favor of the subjects, to shelter any defendant who could show that his actions had even the most tenuous connection to wartime conditions or questions.1 In its efforts to place an impermeable legal barrier between wartime actions and postwar consequences, the North Carolina Supreme Court confronted the same contentious and intricate questions about the war [End Page 105] that it hoped the legislature's blanket, amnesty and pardon law would erase from the minds of individual North Carolinians. When did the Civil War end and peace dawn? At what point and under what conditions did settling local scores in the bitterly divided state mutate from a justifiable wartime action to a criminal act of assault or murder? Entangled in these fundamental questions about the condition of the state's social order were more intricate legal distinctions. Did the Confederacy ever exist as a government with legal jurisdiction over states and citizens, or was it a collection of rebellious people without legal standing? What powers, if any, did the state constitutional conventions mandated by Congress under the Military Reconstruction Acts of 1867 possess to revise existing state statutes? These questions were not self-contained problems to be resolved episodically. Rather, the court's stance on these questions advanced a vision of postwar governance that empowered the judiciary to act as a bulwark against the expansion of rights-based citizenship that both Congress and broad swaths of the North Carolina populace demanded. The court upheld an all-white legislature's ban on prosecutions for war crimes, denied Republicans the opportunity to revisit that law when they remade North Carolina's constitution after the passage of the Reconstruction Acts, and retroactively established the validity of the Confederacy as a judicial entity. Taken together, these decisions denied postwar citizens the opportunity to redress grievances that they were never able to pursue under the state's wartime legal regime. Unionists, African Americans, and many northern Republicans had hoped that state criminal courts would be a valuable tool for remaking southern society after the defeat of the Confederacy, providing venues where all North Carolinians could seek the equal justice under law that provided the bedrock foundation of their ambitions for citizenship. Yet by using the 1866 Amnesty Act to keep the Civil War out of Reconstruction courts and by preventing subsequent legislative bodies from repealing it, North Carolina's supreme court placed powerful restraints on what a reconstructed citizenry might do to revisit past wrongs. Unlike the much better known political amnesties extended by President Andrew Johnson on May 29, 1865, and again on December 25, 1868, and the Amnesty Act of 1872 passed by Congress and signed into law by President Ulysses S. Grant, the North Carolina [End Page 106] Amnesty Act of 1866 concerned criminal liability rather than the restoration of rights to property and to..." @default.
- W2913390492 created "2019-02-21" @default.
- W2913390492 creator A5023371060 @default.
- W2913390492 date "2019-01-01" @default.
- W2913390492 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
- W2913390492 title "Criminal Amnesty, State Courts, and the Reach of Reconstruction" @default.
- W2913390492 cites W1268474694 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W1484330992 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W1500889930 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W1502560596 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W1507789166 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W1508492460 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W1516355282 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W1540946068 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W1547558846 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W1588705797 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W1601982482 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W1611695466 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W1975903453 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W1992382066 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W1994326868 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W1994954350 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2038138000 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2043206553 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2052712221 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2052937341 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2054090598 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2056358159 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2057285224 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2060330759 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2070203049 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2083893004 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2098343293 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2105837028 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2117347369 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2118478922 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2133886734 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2137525597 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2145324465 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2155672963 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2251300227 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2270305714 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2319588415 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2323907818 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2328660798 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2329490567 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2332411037 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2406661426 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2499762579 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2522409342 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2580324292 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2617107868 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2617780290 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W271284893 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2797042166 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2797344553 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2798433323 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2798713206 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2799082640 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2799374308 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W3046777953 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W3080131112 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W3127375310 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W3143267649 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W335681843 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W365676924 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W373293227 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W562549535 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W570230993 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W577852078 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W584508433 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W588087407 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W607649101 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W628619307 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W633510191 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W654200714 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W655358433 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W66107266 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W808194143 @default.
- W2913390492 cites W2887838267 @default.
- W2913390492 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/soh.2019.0003" @default.
- W2913390492 hasPublicationYear "2019" @default.
- W2913390492 type Work @default.
- W2913390492 sameAs 2913390492 @default.
- W2913390492 citedByCount "0" @default.
- W2913390492 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W2913390492 hasAuthorship W2913390492A5023371060 @default.
- W2913390492 hasConcept C11413529 @default.
- W2913390492 hasConcept C139621336 @default.
- W2913390492 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
- W2913390492 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
- W2913390492 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
- W2913390492 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
- W2913390492 hasConcept C2778976748 @default.
- W2913390492 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
- W2913390492 hasConcept C48103436 @default.
- W2913390492 hasConcept C81631423 @default.
- W2913390492 hasConcept C94625758 @default.