CLINTON V. CITY OF NEW YORK 524 U.S. 417 (1998) CASE BRIEF

CLINTON V. CITY OF NEW YORK

524 U.S. 417 (1998)

NATURE OF THE CASE: This was a dispute over the Line Item Veto Act passed by Congress. This was an appeal from a District Court’s finding that the statute is unconstitutional.

FACTS: The Line Item Veto Act (Act), became effective on January 1, 1997. The President exercised his authority to cancel one provision in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 and two provisions in the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997. The plaintiffs in the first case are the City of New York, two hospital associations, one hospital, and two unions representing health care employees. The plaintiffs in the second are a farmers' cooperative consisting of about 30 potato growers in Idaho and an individual farmer who is a member and officer of the cooperative. The District Court consolidated the two cases and determined that at least one of the plaintiffs in each had standing under Article III of the Constitution. On the merits, the District Court held that the cancellations did not conform to the constitutionally mandated procedures for the enactment or repeal of laws in two respects. First, the laws that resulted after the cancellations 'were different from those consented to by both Houses of Congress.' Moreover, the President violated Article I 'when he unilaterally cancelled provisions of duly enacted statutes.' As a separate basis for its decision, the District Court also held that the Act 'impermissibly disrupts the balance of powers among the three branches of government.'

ISSUE:

RULE OF LAW:

HOLDING AND DECISION:

LEGAL ANALYSIS:

Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner