Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
Dksuddeth, can you give an example of the USSC declaring a law constitutional and telling the Executive branch to enforce it followed by the Executive then declaring the law still to be unconstitutional? I've never heard of such a blatant disregard for the separation of powers and I wonder if it ever happened or if you were just making a point.
|
Not sure of exact details here, but the first example is between andrew jackson, chief justice Marshall, and the cherokee indians concerning in Cherokee Nation vs. Georgia. The USSC determined that the federal treaty that the Nation signed with the Federal government took precedence over the laws of Georgia and the Indian Removal Act and ordered that the Cherokee could not be forcibly removed. Andrew Jackson ignored that ruling and ordered the troops to remove the Cherokee anyway. (The quote attributed to Jackson, "John Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce it!", is most likely false)
The next one concerns Abraham Lincoln. During the Civil War, Lincoln suspended Habeus Corpus and started arresting people who criticized the president and the war effort for the crime of sedition. Chief Justice Taney, who was sitting in the Maryland district Circuit Court, ruled
"1. That the president [...] cannot suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, nor authorize a military officer to do it. 2. That a military officer has no right to arrest and detain a person not subject to the rules and articles of war [...] except in aid of the judicial authority, and subject to its control."
This angered Lincoln who then issued an arrest warrant for Justice Taney and had federal marshalls carry out the warrant. So this would be a case of the courts declaring an action/law unconstitutional and the president doing it anyway.
The latest would have been US vs. Padilla but before the USSC could actually rule on that case, Padilla was transferred out of military custody and put in to federal DOJ custody for other charges. This was a way of avoiding a ruling which would have forced Bush's hand in either continuing to use a law deemed unconstitutional or capitulating to the USSC and it's decison on constitutionality.