How does the declaration of "state of emergency", "martial law" and other extraordinary measures allowed by the Constitution and the law, affect the civil liberties (Bill of Rights). Explore all the possibilities that the President, the Congress, and the States have in order to adopt these measures and how far they can go with them in cases like the crisis of the Corona Virus and other emergency cases"

Although the United States and Canada have had quite different constitutional frameworks, their uses of emergency powers through most of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries were very similar. In the nineteenth century, national troops were used to put down local rebellions in both countries, often at the request of local governors. With World War I, however, both moved to a statute-based system of regulating emergencies. In Canada, the War Powers Act provided broad delegations of power from the parliament to the executive. In the U. S., delegations were also broad, but accomplished through a series of smaller statutes. These frameworks lasted until abuses of emergency powers were exposed in both countries in the 1970s. And there the parallel history ended. Canada adopted a comprehensive constitutional revision that brought all emergency powers within constitutional understandings.

Answer: The declaration of "state of emergency", "martial law" and other extraordinary measures is allowed by the Constitution because The National Emergencies Act is a United States federal law passed to end all previous national emergencies and to formalize the emergency powers of the President. The Act empowers the President to activate special powers during a crisis but imposes certain procedural formalities when invoking such powers.

Explanation:

This proclamation was within the limits of the act that established the United States Shipping Board. The first president to declare a national emergency was President Lincoln, during the American Civil War, when he believed that the United States itself was coming to an end, and presidents asserted the power to declare emergencies without limiting their scope or duration, without citing the relevant statutes, and without congressional oversight. The Supreme Court in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer limited what a president could do in such an emergency, but did not limit the emergency declaration power itself. It was due in part to concern that a declaration of "emergency" for one purpose should not invoke every possible executive emergency power, that Congress in 1976 passed the National Emergencies Act.