{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

clinton v. city of new york brief

clinton v. city of new york brief - the Line Item Veto Act...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Courtney Smith Professor King Con Law 4200 9/20/10 Clinton v. City of New York Facts: The case started in 1996 when the Court stuck down the Line Item Veto Act. The Line Veto Act gives the President the power to “cancel in whole” three types of provisions that have been signed into law: “any dollar amount of discretionary budget authority, any item of new direct spending, or any limited tax benefit.” these are terms defined in the Act. The Act also requires the President to adhere to precise procedures whenever he exercises his cancellation authority, but first he must identify legislative history, purposes, and other relevant information before cancellation. Issues: Did the President's power to opt for revoking individual portions of bills, under
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: the Line Item Veto Act, breach the Presentment Clause of Article I? Yes Reasoning: The Court said that under the Presentment Clause, legislation that passes both Houses of Congress must either be entirely signed/proved or rejected /vetoed by the President. The constitutional return takes place before the bill becomes a law, while statutory cancellation occurs after the bill becomes a law. The Line Item Veto Act was not authorized by the Constitution. Holdings: The Courts decision was 6 to 3 based on the grounds of Separation of Powers since the Line Item Veto Act challenged its constitutionality....
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online