President/Executive Department Commons^™

The Story Of The Steel Seizure Case, Patricia L. Bellia

Book Chapters

In 1952, during the Korean War, President Truman seized control of American steel mills to prevent a strike that threatened the war effort. This action, prompted by a labor dispute between steelworkers and operators, led to a landmark Supreme Court case, Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer. The Court ultimately ruled that the President lacked the authority to seize the steel mills without explicit congressional authorization, establishing limits on presidential power.

Liberty, Judicial Review, And The Rule Of Law At Guantanamo: A Battle Half Won, Douglass Cassel

Journal Articles

In Boumediene v. Bush, 128 S. Ct. 2229 (2008), five members of the Supreme Court held that foreign prisoners at Guantanamo enjoy the constitutional privilege of habeas corpus; that their imprisonment had lasted too long for the Court to await completion of statutory review by lower courts of military tribunal findings that the prisoners were "enemy combatants"; and that the statutory judicial review was too deficient to substitute for the Great Writ.

Four Justices vigorously dissented. On the surface they differed on the history of the reach of the common law writ of habeas corpus, and on the procedural …

Unfunding Terror - Perspectives On Unfunding Terror (Panel One), Jimmy Gurulé

Journal Articles

According to the FBI, the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon that claimed the lives of 2,973 innocent civilians required as much as $500,000 to stage. At the time, al Qaeda, the jihadi terrorist organization responsible for the mass killings, was operating on an annual budget between $30 and $50 million. However, despite the obvious fact that terrorists need money to support their terrorist operations and organizational infrastructure, prior to 9/11, preventing the financing of terrorism was not a priority for the United States or international community. Moreover, a comprehensive legal framework to …

The Lame Ducks Of Marbury, John Copeland Nagle

Journal Articles

The election of 1800 was one of the most contested - and important - in American history. After it became clear that neither President John Adams nor a Federalist majority in Congress had been reelected, they acted during the lame-duck period to preserve their influences far into the future. They did so by appointing John Marshall as Chief Justice, ratifying the Treaty with France, creating numerous new federal judicial positions, and filling many of those positions with friends, family, and Federalists (including William Marbury). Not surprisingly, Jefferson and his supporters protested these actions as contrary to the will of the …

Executive Power In Youngstown's Shadows, Patricia L. Bellia

Journal Articles

Fifty years after it was handed down, the Supreme Court's decision in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer is among the most important of the Court's separation of powers cases. This Article explores two quite different legacies of the Youngstown case. First, Youngstown has a symbolic or rhetorical power, in that it stands as an example of a court invalidating the actions of a coordinate branch of government in a politically delicate context. When a court wields this weapon, it can take some cover in Youngstown's shadows, and the possibility of a court exercising this power disciplines the executive …

Avoiding Constitutional Questions As A Three-Branch Problem, William K. Kelley

Journal Articles

This article criticizes the cardinal rule of statutory construction known as the avoidance canon - that statutes must be interpreted to avoid raising serious constitutional questions - as failing to respect the proper constitutional roles of both Congress and the Executive. It argues that the avoidance canon in practice cannot be grounded in legislative supremacy, which is the common justification for it offered by the Supreme Court, because it assumes without foundation that Congress would always prefer not to come close to the constitutional line in enacting statutes. Instead, the avoidance canon creates pressure for courts to adopt statutory meanings …