| Venue: | SCOTUS |
| Facts: | McCardle is being detained by a military authority for publishing his anti-reconstruction newspaper. Congress had passed a statute in 1867 saying that federal courts could have power to grant habeas writs. While McCardle's case is pending, Congress repeals that statute (an 1868 act, targeted at McCardle). |
| Posture: | McCardle alleges that he's unlawfully restrained and petitions for a habeas writ in the lower court. The writ was issued, but the military commander denies that the detention is unlawful. Appeal. |
| Issue: | Does the 1868 act take away the jurisdiction granted in the 1867 act, and if so, what are the effects? |
| Holding: | Yes, and this means that McCardle's avenue for petition is no longer open, and that therefore he can't appeal. He loses. |
| Rule: | The court does not look into the motives of the legislature. Repealed statutes are as though they never existed. |
| Reasoning: | SCOTUS has appellate jurisdiction granted in the Constitution, but subject to such exceptions as Congress cares to make. Congress had the power to make the 1867 act, and that means it can be repealed. |
| Dicta: | We still have whatever habeas jurisdiction we had prior to the 1867 act-- Congress only repealed that act, not whatever pre-existed it. |