Remus wrote in
news:9f6e308f-8e1a-47ef-b459-e96be2ff4150@k36g2000prb.googlegroups.com :
>
> The results are obvious.
>
> The United States in the early 1800s becomes
> modern Thailand.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_Court_of_Thailand
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005%E2%80%932006_Thai_political_crisis
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_dissolution_charges_in_Thai_politics,_
> 2006
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008%E2%80%932009_Thai_political_crisis
>
I really do not see Marshall's recusing himself leading to a constitutional
crisis. This would happen only if the remaining Justices, in his absence,
decided to issue the writ of mandamus. And this is very unlikely, inasmuch
as they have all sorts of ways of avoiding such a decision (and the likely
confrontation with Jefferson it would cause): like Marshall, they could
declare section 13 of the Judiciary Act unconstitutional (and as I mentioned,
this declaration was *not* the most controversial aspect of *Marbury* at the
time) or they could interpret it as not authorizing the Supreme Court to
issue writs of mandmaus except in cases where it already had jursidiction, or
they could rule that mandamus was not the proper remedy, or they could rule
that Marbury was not entitled to his commission because there was no actual
delivery. (That last course would be an implicit rebuke to Marshall's
conduct as acting Secretary of State--unless the commissions were complete
when signed and sealed, Marshall's failure to deliver them was negligent--so
perhaps the Court would be unlikely to take it, but at least it would be more
likely than Marshall himself to do so...)
--
David Tenner
dtenner@ameritech.net |
