You might look at Emily Van Tassel and Paul FInkelman, IMPEACHABLE OFFENCES: A Documentary History of Impeacement (CQ PRESS)
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > On impeachment, I have contemporary discussion of the issue in > the Chase and Johnson impeachments in my Constitutional > Construction book. I'm away from the office, where I might be > able to locate a more definitive modern scholarly treatment, > but you might consult Michael Gerhardt's book on impeachments. > I think I might have discussed the issue briefly in my Policy > Review piece on the aftermath of the Clinton impeachment > (2000, I think -- its online). > > keith > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Eastman, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wednesday, October 1, 2003 4:58 pm > Subject: Re: Presidents and the Court > > > Thanks, Keith. I almost sent the note just to you! But I > needed > > it quickly, so on the chance you were not on e-mail, sent it > to the > > whole list. > > > > Cheers, > > John > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Keith E. Whittington [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 > > [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 > > > > > > > >
