2016 Postmortem

The power of the executive to declare martial law is inherent in the President's role as commander and chief and resided within the head of the military at common law at the time of the Founding.

The great part of your observation is that even Section 9 limits only Congress' power to suspend the Writ (which is explained in Milligan) and in a different way in Felker.

The question then arises whether the Constitution limits the President's power to suspend the writ. The answer to that question is easier. Because we are a government of enumerated powers, the Constitution would have to limit the President's power to suspend the Writ ONLY if it had granted him ANY power to do so in the first place. Unlike the power to impose martial law, which is (implicitly) enumerated in Article II, Section 2, nowhere does the Constitution grant the power to suspend the Writ the executive.

Of course, this all leaves open the question whether the executive can impose martial law during a time of civil unrest, insurrection, etc. (although history teaches that he/she can). More importantly, it leaves open the thornier questions of whether Our President could do so in the event it is revealed that our elections had been corrupted by a Trump/Putting conspiracy AND the one upon which people most disagree, should he do so.

Again, thanks!!