"I do not think the United States would come to an end if we [the Court] lost our power to declare an Act of Congress void. I do think the Union would be imperiled if we could not make that declaration as to the laws of the several States".[78]
By and large, this still sizes up the situation.
[2] _The Genessee Chief_, 12 How. 443 (1851), overturning _The Thomas Jefferson_, 10 Wheat. 428 (1825).
[3] Knox _v._ Lee, 12 Wall. 457 (1871); Hepburn _v._ Griswold, 8 Wall. 603 (1870).
[4] Pollock _v._ Farmers' Loan & Trust Co., 157 U.S. 429; Same, 158 U.S. 601.
[6] Smith _v._ Allwright, 321 U.S. 649, 665.
[8] _The Supreme Court in United States History_, III, 470-471 (1922).
[9] The Dartmouth College Case (1819) occupies 197 pages of 4 Wheaton; Gibbons _v._ Ogden (1824), 240 pages of 9 Wheaton; The Charles River Bridge case (1837), 230 pages of 11 Peters; the Passenger Cases (1849), 290 pages of 7 Howard; the Dred Scott Case (1857), 240 pages of 19 Howard; _Ex parte_ Milligan (1866), 140 pages of 4 Wallace; the first Pollock Case (1895), 325 pages of 157 U.S.; Myers _v._ United States (1926), 243 pages of 272 U.S.
[10] Max Farrand, _The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787_, III, 240-241 (1911).
[11] See Taney's words in 5 How. 504, 573-574 (1847), and 7 How. 283, 465-70 (1849).
[13] 295 U.S. 495 (1935); 298 U.S. 238 (1936).
[18] Dobbins _v._ Commsrs., 16 Pet. 435 (1842); Collector _v._ Day, 11 Wall. 113. (1870).
[20] For references and further details, see E.S. Corwin, _Court over Constitution_, 129-176 (1938).
[21] [Transcriber's Note: Footnote 21 is missing from original text.]
[22] In this connection, _see_ Oklahoma _v._ Civil Service Comm'n., 330 U.S. 127, 142-145 (1947).
[28] _See also_ University of Illinois _v._ United States, 289 U.S. 48, 59 (1933). In Lichter _v._ United States, 334 U.S. 742, 782 (1948), Justice Burton, speaking for the Court, says: "The war powers of Congress and the President are only those which are derived from the Constitution", but he adds: "the primary implication of a war power is that it shall be an effective power to wage war successfully", which looks very like an attempt to duck the doctrine of an inherent war power while appropriating its results.