Clinton v. City of New York case brief

Clinton v. City of New York case brief summary
524 U.S. 417 (1998)

CASE SYNOPSIS

Appellants sought review of the judgment from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia under an action challenging the constitutionality of the Line Item Veto Act, 2 U.S.C.S. § 691 et seq. (1994 ed., Supp. II).

CASE FACTS
Appellees challenged the constitutionality of the Line Item Veto Act (Act), after appellant, the United States President exercised his authority under the Act to cancel one provision in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, and two provisions of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997.

DISCUSSION:

• On review, the United States Supreme Court affirmed that the cancellation procedures set forth in the Act violated the Presentment Clause of the Constitution, U.S. Const. art. I, § 7, cl. 2. 
• The Court held that constitutional silence on the subject of unilateral Presidential action that either repeals or amends parts of duly enacted statutes is equivalent to an express prohibition. 
• Thus, cancellations pursuant to the Act had no legal force or effect and failed to satisfy the procedures set out in Article I, § 7.

OUTCOME
Judgment was affirmed in favor of appellees because the cancellation procedures authorized by the Line Item Veto Act were not authorized by the Constitution.

Recommended Supplements for Administrative Law
Examples & Explanations: Administrative Law, Fourth Edition
Administrative Law and Process: In a Nutshell (Nutshell Series)