NEW PATTERNS IN JUDICIAL CONTROL of the presidency have emerged since the early 1950's, permitting us to question the validity of the usual commentaries of constitutional scholars.' For the most part, these commentaries have focused upon the infrequency and inefficacy of judicial checks upon presidential powers, claiming that they operate only upon minor issues or in cases arising under unique circumstances. For example, Professor Schubert has stated that Americans expect the Supreme Court to "uphold the majesty of the law against the pretensions of a usurper." However, he adds that such an expectation is not supported by history, since "in every major constitutional crisis ... the President has emerged the victor."' Other scholars, such as Professor Rossiter, have found little in American constitutional history resembling a major victory for the Court, with the possible exceptions of Schechter Poultry Co. v. United States, and Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. v. Sawyer. http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol10/iss1/1/
Dionisopoulos, P. Allan
"New Patterns in Judicial Control of the Presidency: 1950's to 1970's,"
Akron Law Review: Vol. 10
, Article 8.
Available at: http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol10/iss1/8