By the constitution of the United States, the President is
invested with certain important political powers, in the
exercise of which he is to use his own discretion, and is
accountable only to his country in his political character,
and to his own conscience. To aid him in the performance of
these duties, he is authorized to appoint certain officers,
who act by his authority and in conformity with his orders.

In such cases, their acts are his acts; and whatever opinion
may be entertained of the manner in which executive discretion
may be used, still there exists, and can exist, no power to
control that discretion. The subjects are political. They
respect the nation, not individual rights, and being entrusted
to the executive, the decision of the executive is
conclusive.[42]

From these words arises the doctrine of Political Questions, an escape
clause from the trammels of judicial review for high executive officers
in the performance of their discretionary duties. The doctrine was
continued, even expanded, by Marshall's successor. In Luther _v._
Borden,[43] decided in 1849, the Court was invited to review the
determination by the President that the existing government of Rhode
Island was "republican" in form. It declined the invitation, holding
that the decision of Congress and of the President as Congress's
delegate was final in the matter, and bound the courts. Otherwise said
Chief Justice Taney, the guarantee clause of the Constitution (Article
IV, section 4) "is a guarantee of anarchy and not of order". But a year
later the same Chief Justice, speaking again for the unanimous Court,
did not hesitate to rule that the President's powers as
commander-in-chief were purely military in character, those of any top