The petition for the writ went directly to the Chief Justice in Washington, not to the District Court in Baltimore. Taney stated so himself in Ex Parte Merryman. As I have pointed out, the Judiciary Act of 1789 says:
And that either of the justices of the supreme court, as well as judges of the district courts, shall have power to grant writs of habeas corpus for the purpose of an inquiry into the cause of commitment.
Thus, the habeas corpus inquiry in this case was not a District Court matter. General Cadwallader's response to the writ of habeas corpus was addressed to Taney as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, not the District Court. Taney's actual decision was listed as a decision of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, not the District Court. If a Supreme Court Justice can receive writs of habeas corpus, then he can decide if the defendant was being illegally held or if the writ was being denied. That's the purpose of a habeas corpus hearing. Taney's decision addressed that.
Taney's decision had the full force of the court behind it. The only reason the writ was not enforced was the army following Lincoln's command. Lincoln did not challenge Taney's decision which is still valid and cited in Supreme Court cases. He just ignored it knowing Taney couldn't fight the army.
So you keep saying. And you insist that the Merryman case was a Supreme Court decision. But I'm still puzzled on how the Merryman case became a Supreme Court case to begin with given the constitutional restrictions on jurisdiction. And I'm also hoping that you can provide me with the names of some other cases where a single justice decided the matter for the whole court. I'm anxious to improve my wealth of knowledge. Can't you help me here?
No it didn't, because it wasn't a court decision. As the USSC said in Carper v. Fitzgerald, "The order of the judge that the papers be filed, and his order recorded in the circuit court, does not make his decision as judge a decision of the court."