The Oyez Project Virtual Tour of the Supreme Court Building

Abstract

Oral Argument: Tuesday, March 4, 1890
Decision: Monday, April 14, 1890
Categories: criminal, executive power, habeas corpus, presidency, supremacy clause

Advocates

Not available

Facts of the Case

Suspecting a plot against Justice Stephen J. Field's life, the U.S. Attorney General appointed Neagle, a U.S. Marshall, to protect him. Acting as Field's bodyguard, Neagle shot and killed a man who appeared about to attack the justice. After California officials arrested and jailed Neagle, the U.S. sought his release by a writ of habeas corpus.

Question

Was the state obligated to obey the writ even though no national statute empowered the Attorney General to provide judges with bodyguards?

Conclusion

Yes. The Court held that the Attorney General acted appropriately since assigning Neagle as Field's bodyguard assured that the nation's laws would be faithfully executed. Furthermore, Neagle's actions were consistent with a congressional statute which provided U.S. Marshalls with "the same powers, in executing the laws" as state sheriffs and deputies (who would have been allowed to deter an attack on Field's life).

Cite this page

The Oyez Project, In re Neagle, 135 U.S. 1 (1890),
available at: <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1851-1900/1889/1889_1472/>
(last visited ).