Summary

Nathan Clifford The Secretary v. McGarrahan — Opinion of the Court

Though mandamus may sometimes lie against an executive officer to compel him to perform a mere ministerial act required of him by law, yet such an officer, to whom public duties are confided by law, is not subject to the control of the courts in the exercise of the judgment and discretion which the law reposes in him as part of his official functions.
Source: Wikisource

Nathan Clifford The Secretary v. McGarrahan — Opinion of the Court

On the contrary, the express provision is, that the regulations for executing the law shall be provided by the Commissioner of the General Land Office, and the better opinion is, that the application to be allowed to purchase the land embraced in such rejected claim should be made to the Commissioner, and not to the Secretary of the Interior, as the right to purchase of the United States will never yest until the land is surveyed under existing laws.
Source: Wikisource

Nathan Clifford The Secretary v. McGarrahan — Opinion of the Court

Since the decision of this court in the case of McIntire v. Wood, [5] it has been regarded as the settled law of the court that the Circuit Courts of the United States in the several States do not possess the power to issue writs of mandamus, except in cases in which it may be necessary to the exercise of their jurisdiction. [6]
Authority to that effect might doubtless be given to those courts by an act of Congress; but the insuperable difficulty at present is, that neither the Judiciary Act nor any other act of Congress has conferred upon them any such power.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature