Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417 (1998), [1] was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held, 6–3, that the line-item veto, as implemented in the Line Item Veto Act of 1996, violated the Presentment Clause of the United States Constitution because it impermissibly gave the President of the United States the power to unilaterally amend or ...
The Line Item Veto Act Pub. L. 104–130 (text) was a federal law of the United States that granted the president the power to line-item veto budget bills passed by Congress. It was signed into law on April 9, 1996, but its effect was brief it was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court just over two years later, in Clinton v.
Congress granted this power to the president by the Line Item Veto Act of 1996 to control "pork barrel spending", but in 1998 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the act to be unconstitutional in a 6–3 decision in Clinton v.
And the Supreme Court upheld congressional spending power in a 1996 decision that ruled it unconstitutional for a president to cancel only one part of a law, also known as a line-item veto.
The Supreme Court ruled in 1996 that the line-item veto, for presidents to cancel parts of legislation rather than entire laws, was unconstitutional. Steve Vladeck, a law professor at Georgetown ...
The Supreme Court ruled in 1996 that the line-item veto, for presidents to cancel parts of legislation rather than entire laws, was unconstitutional.
The line-item veto, also called the partial veto, is a special form of veto power that authorizes a chief executive to reject particular provisions of a bill enacted by a legislature without vetoing the entire bill. Many countries have different standards for invoking the line-item veto if it exists at all.
In addition to the vetoes below, House and Senate leaders ruled that Beshear did not have the legal authority to issue a line-item veto of House Bill 8 because it was a revenue, not appropriations ...