Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (58830)	11/25/2002 6:13:45 PM
From: Brian Sullivan	Read Replies (1) of 281500

That's one reason the President got a line-item veto a few years ago. Struck down by the US Supreme Court in 1998: washingtonpost.com Court Strikes Down Line-Item Veto Democratic Sens. Carl Levin (center) and Robert C. Byrd (right) welcomed the court's decision by displaying their personal copies of the Constitution. (AP) By Helen Dewar and Joan Biskupic Washington Post Staff Writers Friday, June 26, 1998; Page A01 The Supreme Court yesterday struck down the broad new line-item veto authority that Congress had given the president to cancel specific items in spending and tax bills. Within a couple of hours of the ruling, the law's backers announced they will try again to find a constitutional way to expand the president's powers to cut pork-barrel expenditures. In a 6 to 3 decision, the court held that the line-item veto law violates a constitutional requirement that legislation be passed by both houses of Congress and presented in its entirety to the president for signature or veto.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next