No Walt. That is simply not the case.
It simply --is-- the case, unless you can show that you have information that Chief Justice Rehnquist didn't consider when he said the question of "whether the president may suspend the Writ remains unanswered to this very day."
Walt
No Walt. It is simply not the case. You are trying to avoid responsibility for your own argument by assigning and equating it with Rehnquist when in fact it is your own and nothing more.
The tactic is decietful and childish. You pretend that Bill Rehnquist is making your argument for you and, on his authority, you declare the argument of your own that you assign to him to be superior to mine, while simultaneously denying and ignoring two stronger authorities that I built my argument on, Taney and Marshall. I suppose it was a nice try, Walt, but you simply are not going to get away with that kind of a charade around here.
Boiled down this debate comes to my argument, supported by Taney and Marshall among other pieces of evidence, against your argument, supported loosely by Rehnquist and heavily upon your inability to concede any flaw whatsoever on the part of your false god, The Lincoln.