Premium
The Historical Presidency : Competing Conceptions of the Separation of Powers: Washington's Request for an Advisory Opinion in the Crisis of 1793
Author(s) -
Starr Nicholas C.
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
presidential studies quarterly
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.337
H-Index - 5
eISSN - 1741-5705
pISSN - 0360-4918
DOI - 10.1111/psq.12212
Subject(s) - presidency , political science , separation of powers , neutrality , supreme court , law , administration (probate law) , government (linguistics) , politics , advisory opinion , executive branch , public administration , relation (database) , international law , international court , philosophy , linguistics , public international law , database , computer science
President Washington's request for a formal advisory opinion at the height of the neutrality crisis and the Supreme Court's refusal to grant his request have never received more than passing attention from political scientists. Yet these events bear directly on fundamental issues regarding the purpose and practice of the separation of powers and the relation between a republican government and the citizenry it serves. In this article, I argue that, properly understood, Washington's request and the Court's refusal shed new light on the underlying theoretical rationale for executive–judicial cooperation and the political dangers of this cooperation. Moreover, by attending to the actions of the Washington administration in the aftermath of the Court's refusal, I show that the manner in which presidents interact with the people cannot be neatly separated from the institutional relationships between the branches of government.