HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012392.jpg
3.6 MB
Extraction Summary
8
People
5
Organizations
1
Locations
3
Events
3
Relationships
5
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal or research memorandum, likely for a congressional committee, citing historical precedents on executive power.
File Size:
3.6 MB
Summary
This document is a legal and historical memorandum, identified by the footer 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012392', which compiles precedents regarding the separation of powers within the U.S. government. It cites historical statements, letters, and congressional reports to explore the President's authority to challenge or refuse to implement legislation deemed unconstitutional. The document contains no information related to Jeffrey Epstein or any associated individuals or events.
People (8)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Jimmy Carter | President of the United States |
Authored a 'Message to the Congress on Legislative Vetoes' on June 21, 1978, expressing strong opposition to legislat...
|
| James Wilson | Founding Father/Legal Scholar |
Made a statement on December 1, 1787, arguing that the Constitution is paramount to the legislature and that the Pres...
|
| Jonathan Elliot | Author/Compiler |
His work, 'Debates on the Federal Constitution' (1836), is cited as the source for James Wilson's statement.
|
| Chief Justice Chase | Chief Justice of the Supreme Court |
In an 1868 letter, he supported President Johnson's removal of Secretary of War Stanton, arguing the President had an...
|
| Gerrit Smith | Recipient of a letter |
Was the recipient of the April 19, 1868 letter from Chief Justice Chase.
|
| J. Schuckers | Author/Biographer |
Author of 'The Life and Public Services of Salmon Portland Chase' (1874), which quoted Chief Justice Chase's letter.
|
| President Johnson | President of the United States |
Removed Secretary of War Stanton from office, believing the Tenure-of-Office Act was unconstitutional.
|
| Mr. Stanton | Secretary of War |
Was removed from office by President Johnson, an act supported by Chief Justice Chase as a way to challenge the Tenur...
|
Organizations (5)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Department of Justice |
Mentioned as the repository for a presidential memorandum concerning the unconstitutionality of the Lend-Lease Act.
|
|
| Congress |
Discussed in relation to legislative vetoes and its power dynamic with the Executive Branch.
|
|
| Executive Branch |
Discussed in the context of its powers and limitations regarding legislation passed by Congress.
|
|
| Supreme Court |
Mentioned as the ultimate arbiter of the constitutionality of the Tenure-of-Office Act.
|
|
| House Committee on Government Operations |
Authored a 1985 report concluding that the President could not refuse to implement the Competition in Contracting Act.
|
Timeline (3 events)
1985
The House Committee on Government Operations issued a report (H.R. Rep. No. 138) arguing the President's suspension of the Competition in Contracting Act was unconstitutional.
United States
House Committee on Government Operations
Dec. 1, 1787
James Wilson's statement on the supremacy of the Constitution over legislative acts during the debates on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution.
United States
circa 1868
President Johnson removed Secretary of War Stanton, challenging the constitutionality of the Tenure-of-Office Act.
United States
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
The document discusses the U.S. Constitution, federal government, and historical legal precedents.
|
Relationships (3)
The document states that President Johnson removed Secretary of War Stanton from his position.
Chase wrote a letter to Smith on April 19, 1868.
Carter sent a 'Message to the Congress on Legislative Vetoes' in 1978.
Key Quotes (5)
"[t]he inclusion of [a legislative veto] in a bill will be an important factor in my decision to sign or to veto it."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012392.jpg
Quote #1
"[a]s for legislative vetoes over the execution of programs already prescribed in legislation and in bills I must sign for other reasons, the Executive Branch will generally treat them as 'report-and-wait' provisions... we will not, under our reading of the Constitution, consider it legally binding."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012392.jpg
Quote #2
"the power of the Constitution was paramount to the power of the legislature acting under that Constitution... when it comes to be discussed before the judges,-- when they consider its principles, and find it to be incompatible with the superior power of the Constitution,-- it is their duty to pronounce it void . . . In the same manner, the President of the United States could shield himself, and refuse to carry into effect an act that violates the Constitution."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012392.jpg
Quote #3
"the President had a perfect right, and indeed was under the highest obligation, to remove Mr. Stanton, if he made the removal not in wanton disregard of a constitutional law, but with a sincere belief that the Tenure-of-Office Act was unconstitutional and for the purpose of bringing the question before the Supreme Court."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012392.jpg
Quote #4
"[t]o adopt the view that one's oath to support and defend the Constitution is a license to exercise any available power in furtherance of one's own constitutional interpretation would quickly destroy the entire constitutional scheme."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012392.jpg
Quote #5
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (4,425 characters)
my opinion, is clearly unconstitutional." Id. at 1357. The President stated that, "[i]n order that I may be on record as indicating my opinion that the foregoing provision of the so-called Lend-Lease Act is unconstitutional, and in order that my approval of the bill, due to the existing exigencies of the world situation, may not be construed as a tacit acquiescence in any contrary view, I am requesting you to place this memorandum in the official files of the Department of Justice. I am desirous of having this done for the further reason that I should not wish my action in approving the bill which includes this invalid clause, to be used as a precedent for any future legislation comprising provisions of a similar nature." Id. at 1358.
2) Message to the Congress on Legislative Vetoes, Pub. Papers of Jimmy Carter 1146 (Jun. 21, 1978): In this memorandum President Carter expressed his strong opposition to legislative vetoes and stated that "[t]he inclusion of [a legislative veto] in a bill will be an important factor in my decision to sign or to veto it." Id. at 1148. He further stated that, "[a]s for legislative vetoes over the execution of programs already prescribed in legislation and in bills I must sign for other reasons, the Executive Branch will generally treat them as 'report-and-wait' provisions. In such a case, if Congress subsequently adopts a resolution to veto an Executive action, we will give it serious consideration, but we will not, under our reading of the Constitution, consider it legally binding." Id. at 1149.
Historical Materials
1) Statement of James Wilson on December 1, 1787 on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, reprinted in 2 Jonathan Elliot, Debates on the Federal Constitution 418 (1836): Wilson argued that the Constitution imposed significant -- and sufficient -- restraints on the power of the legislature, and that the President would not be dependent upon the legislature. In this context, he stated that "the power of the Constitution was paramount to the power of the legislature acting under that Constitution; for it is possible that the legislature... may transgress the bounds assigned to it, and an act may pass, in the usual mode, notwithstanding that transgression; but when it comes to be discussed before the judges,-- when they consider its principles, and find it to be incompatible with the superior power of the Constitution,-- it is their duty to pronounce it void . . . In the same manner, the President of the United States could shield himself, and refuse to carry into effect an act that violates the Constitution." Id. at 445-46.
2) Letter from Chief Justice Chase to Gerrit Smith (Apr. 19, 1868), quoted in J. Schuckers, The Life and Public Services of Salmon Portland Chase 577 (1874): Chase stated that President Johnson took the proper action in removing Secretary of War Stanton without Senate approval, in light of Johnson's belief that the statutory restriction on his removal authority was unconstitutional. In this regard, Chase commented that "the President had a perfect right, and indeed was under the highest obligation, to remove Mr. Stanton, if he made the removal not in wanton disregard of a constitutional law, but with a sincere belief that the Tenure-of-Office Act was unconstitutional and for the purpose of bringing the question before the Supreme Court." Id. at 578.
Congressional Materials
1) The President's Suspension of the Competition in Contracting Act is Unconstitutional, H.R. Rep. No. 138, 99th Cong., 1st Sess. (1985): The House Committee on Government Operations concluded that the President lacked the authority to refuse to implement any provision of the Competition in Contracting Act. The Committee stated that, "[t]o adopt the view that one's oath to support and defend the Constitution is a license to exercise any available power in furtherance of one's own constitutional interpretation would quickly destroy the entire constitutional scheme. Such a view, whereby the President pledges allegiance to the Constitution but then determines what the Constitution means, inexorably leads to the usurpation by the Executive of the others' roles." Id. at 11. The Committee also stated that "[t]he Executive's suspension of the law circumvents the constitutionally specified means for expressing Executive objections to law and is a constitutionally impermissible absolute veto
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012392
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document