Another way to look at the distinction is to distinguish the question of the scope of an individual right to judicial review from the systemic demand for the separation of powers. The phrasing in the Suspension clause places that question in the tradition of Marbury v. Madison. The majority was clearly motivated by its own feeling of entitlement, i.e. by the sense that the Constitution requires a certain balance of responsibilities and powers among the branches of government, which is why I highlighted the quote about saying "what the law is." Judicial review is ultimately a right inhering in the judiciary, which only attaches to the individual as a matter of convenience.