Mistretta v. United States(1989) “Non delegation” of Congressional Power

t Congress gave a Sentencing Commission the power to help set sentencing guidelines, which was challenged on the grounds the “nondelegation” principle (that Congress can not delegate its power to legislate. However, that argument was rejected because Congress ordered the commission to set standards based on the current codes, and clearly stated the objectives of Congress. It appears as if the Court wanted to reject the commission, but could not find a way to “give teeth” (Scalia) to the nondelegation doctrine

n Majority: BLACKMUN: The earlier cases invoking the nondelegation doctrine would be narrowly read to apply only in cases where congress made “crimes of acts never before criminalized or delegated regulatory power to private individuals.” In recent years, the application has been limited to the interpretation of statutory delegations that might otherwise be thought unconstitutional.

INS v. Chadha(1983): Legislative Veto

t Congress authorized the Attorney General to suspend the deportation of aliens, subject to disapproval from one of the Houses of Congress. The Supreme Court held oral arguments twice, and under rare circumstance, representative from the House and Senate participated in the argument.

n Majority: BURGER: The Court held all legislative vetoes were unconstitutional because they violated the PRESENTMENT Clause. In addition, the one-House veto was unconstitutional because it violated the principle of bicameralism (which requires action by both Houses). Whenever congressional action has “the purpose and effect of altering the legal rights, duties and relations of persons” outside the legislative branch, Congress must act through both Houses in a bill presented to the President.

Date: 2015-01-02; view: 992