Frederick D. Raines, Director, Office of Management and Budget, et al. v. Robert C. BYRD et al. (521 U.S. 811)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 26, 1997 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 521 U.S. 811 · 117 S. Ct. 2312
- Decided
- June 26, 1997
- Term
- October Term 1996
- Vote
- 7–2
- Majority author
- Justice Rehnquist
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Vacated and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Chief Justice Rehnquist delivered the opinion of the Court. The District Court for the District of Columbia declared the Line Item Veto Act unconstitutional. On this direct appeal, we hold that appellees lack standing to bring this suit, and therefore direct that the judgment of the District Court be vacated and the complaint dismissed. I The appellees are six Members of Congress, four of whom served as Senators and two of whom served as Congressmen in the 104th Congress (1995-1996). On March 27, 1996, the Senate passed a bill entitled the Line Item Veto Act by a vote of 69 to 31. All four appellee Senators voted “nay.” 142 Cong. Rec. S2995. The next day, the House of Representatives passed the identical bill by a vote of 232 to 177. Both appellee Congressmen voted “nay.” Id., at H2986. On April 4, 1996, the President signed the Line Item Veto Act (Act) into law. Pub. L. 104-130,110 Stat. 1200, codified at 2 U. S. C. §691 et seq. (1994 ed., Supp. II). The Act went into effect on January 1, 1997. See Pub. L. 104-130, §5. The next day, appellees filed a complaint in the District Court for the District of Columbia against the two appellants, the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, alleging that the Act was unconstitutional. The provisions of the Act do not use the term “veto.” Instead, the President is given the authority to…
Excerpt of a 34,904-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.