Clinton V. Case Brief

Lindsay Weeks

Legal Brief

1. Title and Citation

Clinton v. City of New York

524 U.S. 417 (1998)

2. Facts of the Case

This case dealt with the introduction of the Line Item Veto Act which merged two primary acts that caused immense controversy among Congress. The first provision “gave the president the power to rescind various expenditures, it established a check on his ability to do so”. This meant that Congress had the ability to “consider disapproval bills” and therefore making the Presidents cancellation “null and void”. The second provision laid out ways for Congress to bring action if any persons are harmfully impacted by the Line Veto Act, and they are able to seek injunctive relief if any part of the act violates the Constitution. June 2, 1997, one day after the act was enacted, six members of congress sued Robert E. Rubin who was secretary of the treasury and Franklin D. Raines who was director of the Office of Management and Budget. The congress members sued on the grounds that the act was unconstitutional due to it expanding the

With the Congressmen winning their case the executive branch appealed it to the U.S. Supreme Court, which heard the case immediately “because the act directed the Court to hear as soon as possible any suit challenging its constitutionality”. The court dismissed that case, Raines v. Byrd on May 27, 1997 because the court did not feel that the congressmen were “the right litigants”. After the Court made their decision, President Clinton invoked the act and cancelled more than 80 items that included money for New York City hospitals and a tax break for potato farmers in Idaho. This angered the parties involved and they filed to sue under one consolidated case against the act and the Court held that the law was an unconstitutional delegation of