Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Paul Ryan and Russ Feingold introducing a line-item veto bill in 2007. In 1996, the United States Congress passed, and President Bill Clinton signed, the Line Item Veto Act of 1996. This act allowed the president to veto individual items of budgeted expenditures from appropriations bills instead of vetoing the entire bill and sending it back to ...
United Kingdom: The monarch has two methods of vetoing a bill. Any bill that has been passed by both the House of Commons and the House of Lords becomes law only when formally approved by the monarch (or their official representative), in a procedure known as royal assent. Legally, the monarch can withhold that consent, thereby vetoing the bill.
The bill was presented to the president on November 2, 1966. October 22, 1966: Pocket vetoed H.R. 3901, A bill for the relief of Miss Elisabeth von Oberndorff. The bill was presented to the president on October 28, 1966. October 22, 1966: Pocket vetoed H.R. 5688, A bill relating to crime and criminal procedure in the District of Columbia.
President Joe Biden announced he is vetoing a bill that would have overturned his student loan relief program. Now, the fate of the program is in the hands of the Supreme Court, which will review ...
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 ...
SB 37 is the third major tax cut bill — and one of at least seven total — the governor has vetoed this year, which comes on the heels of vetoing a major tax cut bill last year.
The bill passed on a four-to-three vote, again on party lines. Republican council members did not suggest any amendments to the ordinance to make it more palatable for their vote.
Under the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, the Attorney General could suspend a deportation proceeding if the deportation would result in "extreme hardship". After making such a finding, the Attorney General would send a report to Congress, and either the House or Senate could veto the Attorney General's decision by majority vote.