Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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.
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 ...
In United States government, the line-item veto, or partial veto, is the power of an executive authority to nullify or cancel specific provisions of a bill, usually a budget appropriations bill, without vetoing the entire legislative package. The line-item vetoes are usually subject to the possibility of legislative override as are traditional ...
The line-item veto is an executive power the governor can exercise under Section 88 of the Kentucky Constitution. It gives governors the ability to line-item veto “appropriations bills.”
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 ...
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 1998, the Supreme Court ruled 6–3 to declare the line-item veto unconstitutional. In Clinton v. City of New York ( 524 U.S. 417 (1998)), the court found the language of the Constitution required each bill presented to the president to be either approved or rejected as a whole.
Kansas Republicans had said Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly’s decision was unconstitutional, but state Attorney General Kris Kobach has decided against a lawsuit “at this time.”