I love the collaberations made possible by this list. I now have to expand my
"acknowledgement" footnote significantly. Many thanks to all who responded.
I have one more that might be equally interesting. Judges serve for good behaviour.
Impeachment requires high crimes and misdemeanors. I believe we have not taken
seriously the possibility of impeachment of judges for non-criminal conduct for a very
long time (since Justice Chase?), but has there ever been a firm decision that the
standard for impeaching judges is the same as for other officials, despite the looser
standard suggested in Article III? Is there a law review article (or articles)
generally regarded as definitive on this question?
Many thanks,
John Eastman
-----Original Message-----
From: Keith E. Whittington [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wed 10/1/2003 2:40 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Subject: Re: Presidents and the Court
That would be Andrew Jackson in response to Worcester v. Georgia, and it is
generally regarded as apocryphal (though somewhat consistent with other things that he
did say, predicting that such a decision would be unenforceable). He did write in a
letter, "the decision of the supreme court has fell still born and they find it cannot
coerce Georgia to yield to its mandate." For discussion, see Charles Warren, The
Supreme Court in United States History, and Richard Longaker, "Andrew Jackson and the
Judiciary," Political Science Quarterly (1956).
Keith Whittington
-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion list for con law professors
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Eastman, John
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 5:33 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Presidents and the Court
I seem to recall a colorful claim by some president or other, opposed to a
particular court ruling, along the lines of: "The Court has issued its ruling, now
let it enforce it."
Can anyone point me to the specific President, case, and citation for this?
Perhaps Truman, in response to the Steel Seizure decision?
Many thanks,
John Eastman
