...Lincoln acknowledged the role of the Supreme Court in reviewing the constitutionality of legislation: I do not forget the position assumed by some, that...constitutional questions are to be decided by the Supreme Court . . . [and that such decisions] are also entitled to very high respect and consideration, in all paralel...

...declared. Lincoln gave the point classic expression in his First Inaugural in speaking of Dred Scott: I do not forget the position assumed by some that constitutional questions are to be decided hy the Supreme Court, nor do I deny that such decisions must be binding in any case upon the parties...

...only been given the power to decide individual cases, and their decisions were intended to be binding upon the parties to a suit as to the object of that suit. They were not intended to establish generally binding law, not even the Supreme Court when interpreting...

...constitutional status of a Supreme Court decision was still in effect, namely that it could bind only the parties to a suit as to the object of that suit. In 1858, it was Stephen A. Douglas who took the position that every pronouncement made by the Supreme...

...constitutional status of a Supreme Court decision was still in effect, namely that it could bind only the parties to a suit as to the object of that suit. In 1858, it was Stephen A. Douglas who took the position that every pronouncement made by the Supreme...

...Lincoln explained the distinction between Marbury and the position urged by plaintiffs as follows: ' I do not forget the position assumed by some, that constitutional questions 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 II 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 a 28 are to be decided by the Supreme Court; nor...

...considered this matter of such importance that he spoke about it at his first inaugural address. He said: "I do not forget the position, assumed by some, that...the parties to a suit, as to the object of that suit . . . And while it is obviously possible that such decision may be erroneous in any given case, still...

...Unanimity is impossible; the rule of a minority, as a permanent arrangement, is wholly inadmissable; so that, rejecting the majority principle, anarchy, or despotism in some form, is all that is left.32 If the existence of morals makes law justified and necessary, it is in principle legitimate...

...Unanimity is impossible; the rule of a minority, as a permanent arrangement, is wholly inadmissible; so that, rejecting the majority principle, anarchy or despotism in some form is all that is left.12 (emphasis added). The partition of India in 1947 is an apt illustration of disregarding Lincoln's...

...Unanimity is impossible; the rule of a minority, as a permanent arrangement, is wholly inadmissible; so that, rejecting the majority principle, anarchy or despotism in some form is all that is left. 40 "All previous historical movements were movements of minorities, or in the interest of minorities....