Constitutional Law: Executive Power Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

Vested in President

A

The entire “executive power” is vested in the President by Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution.
Various executive functions may be and are delegated within the “executive branch” by the
President or by Congress.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Domestic Powers: Appointment

A

Under Article II, Section 2, the President is empowered “with the advice and consent of
the Senate” to appoint all “ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of
the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments
are not herein otherwise provided for . . . but the Congress may by law vest the appointment
of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts
of law, or in the heads of departments.”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Domestic Powers: Appointment of “Independent Counsel” (Special Prosecutor)

A

A special prosecutor with the limited duties of investigating a narrow range
of persons and subjects (e.g., to investigate alleged misconduct of a government
employee) is an inferior officer. Therefore, under the Appointment Clause,
Congress is free to vest the power to appoint a special prosecutor in the judiciary.
[Morrison v. Olson, 487 U.S. 654 (1988)]

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Domestic Powers: No Appointments by Congress

A

Although Congress may appoint its own officers to carry on internal legislative
tasks (i.e., its staff), it may not appoint members of a body with administrative or
enforcement powers; such persons are “officers of the United States” and must,
pursuant to Article II, Section 2, be appointed by the President with senatorial
confirmation unless Congress has vested their appointment in the President alone,
in federal courts, or in heads of departments. [Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976)]

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Recess Appointments

A

The Recess Appointments Clause of the Constitution gives the President the power to
make appointments for vacancy without Senate approval during any Senate recess of
“sufficient duration.” Under the Clause, the Senate is in recess only when it states it is
in recess. If the Senate does not declare a recess and it holds pro forma sessions, the
Senate is not in recess and the President has no power to make appointments without
Senate approval. [NLRB v. Canning, 573 U.S. 513 (2014)]

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Removal

A

As to removal of appointees, the constitution is silent except for ensuring tenure of all Article III judges “during good behavior”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Removal: By President

A

Under the Court’s decisions, the President probably can remove high level, purely
executive officers (e.g., Cabinet members) at will, without any interference from
Congress. However, after Morrison v. Olson, supra, it appears that Congress may
provide statutory limitations (e.g., removal for good cause) on the President’s
power to remove all other executive appointees.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Removal: By Congress - Limitation on Removal Power

A

Congress cannot give itself the power to remove an officer charged with the
execution of laws except through impeachment. A congressional attempt
through legislation to remove from government employment specifically
named government employees is likely to be held invalid as a bill of attainder.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Removal: By Congress - Limitation on Powers of Removable Officers

A

Congress cannot give a government employee who is subject to removal from
office by Congress any powers that are truly executive in nature. For this
reason, Congress could not give to the Comptroller General (who could be
removed from office not only by impeachment but also by a joint resolution of
Congress) the function of establishing the amount of automatic budget reductions
that would be required if Congress failed to make budget reductions
necessary to insure that the federal budget deficit did not exceed a legislatively
established maximum amount. [Bowsher v. Synar, 478 U.S. 714 (1986)]

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Presidential Pardons

A

The President is empowered by Article II, Section 2, “to grant reprieves and pardons for
offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.” This power has been
held to apply before, during, or after trial, and to extend to the offense of criminal contempt, but not to civil contempt, inasmuch as the latter involves the rights of third parties. The
pardon power cannot be limited by Congress, and includes power to commute a sentence on
any conditions the President chooses, as long as they are not independently unconstitutional.
[Schick v. Reed, 419 U.S. 256 (1974)]

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Veto Power: Congress may override veto by ______ vote

A

two-thirds

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

How many days does the President have to Veto?

A

10 days (excepting sundays)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What happens if the President does not veto a bill within 10 days?

A
  1. the bill becomes law if Congress is still in session

2. the bill is automatically vetoed if Congress is not in session (a pocket veto)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Does a brief recess during an annual session create an opportunity for a pocket veto?

A

No.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Line Item Vetoes are ___________

A

unconstitutional.

The veto power allows the President only to approve or reject a bill in toto; he cannot
cancel part (through a line item veto) and approve other parts. Rationale: The
President’s veto power does not authorize him to amend or repeal laws passed by
Congress. [Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417 (1998)]
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Power as Chief Executive

A

The President’s power over internal (i.e., within the United States) affairs as the chief executive
is unclear. Clearly the President has some power to direct subordinate executive officers,
and there is a long history of presidents issuing executive orders. Perhaps the best guide for
determining the validity of presidential actions regarding internal affairs can be based on
Justice Jackson’s opinion in Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952):

(i) Where the President acts with the express or implied authority of Congress, his
authority is at its maximum and his actions likely are valid;

(ii) Where the President acts where Congress is silent, his action will be upheld as long
as the act does not take over the powers of another branch of the government or
prevent another branch from carrying out its tasks [see, e.g., United States v. Nixon,
I.E.7.b., supra—President’s invocation of executive privilege was invalidated because
it kept federal courts from having evidence they needed to conduct a fair criminal
trial]; and

(iii) Where the President acts against the express will of Congress, he has little authority and
his action likely is invalid.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Power as Executive Chief: No Power to Impound and the Take Care Clause

A

It follows from the above that the President has no power to refuse to spend appropriated
funds when Congress has expressly mandated that they be spent. [Kendall
v. United States ex rel. Stokes, 37 U.S. 524 (1838)] Some authorities base this result
on Article II, Section 3, Clause 4—the Take Care Clause—which provides that the
President “shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed . . . .”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Power over external affairs: War

A
Although lacking the power to declare or initiate a “formal” war, the President has extensive
military powers (essentially an external field, although applicable to civil war as well and to
many domestic affairs caught up in military necessities).
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Power over external affairs: War - Actual Hostilities

A

The President may act militarily under his power as commander in chief of the armed
forces and militia (when federalized), under Article II, Section 2, in actual hostilities
against the United States without a congressional declaration of war. But Congress may
limit the President under its power to enact a military appropriation every two years.
(A military appropriation may not be for more than two years.)

20
Q

Power over external affairs: War - Military Government

A

This power includes the establishment of military governments in occupied territories,
including military tribunals.

21
Q

Power over external affairs: Foreign Relations

A

The President’s power to represent and act for the United States in day-to-day foreign
relations is paramount. He has the power to appoint and receive ambassadors and make
treaties (with the advice and consent of the Senate), and to enter into executive agreements.
His power is broad even as to foreign affairs that require congressional consent.

22
Q

Power over external affairs: Foreign Relations - Power to recognize foreign states

A

The power to recognize foreign states lies exclusively with the president. [See
Zivotofsky v. Kerry, 135 S. Ct. 2076 (2015)—legislation requiring the secretary of state,
upon request, to designate “Israel” and not “Jerusalem” as the place of birth on the passport of a U.S. citizen born in Jerusalem infringes on the long-time executive branch
policy of favoring recognition of Jerusalem]

23
Q

Power over external affairs: Foreign Relations - standard of review – rational basis at most

A

Generally, courts defer to the President and Congress regarding foreign affairs. When
reviewing whether an act violates a constitutional right, courts apply rational basis review

24
Q

Treaty Power

A

The treaty power is granted to the President “by and with the advice and consent of the
Senate, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur.” [Art. II, §2, cl. 2]

25
Q

Treaty Power: Supreme Law

A

Like other federal law, treaties are the “supreme law of the land.” Any state action or
law in conflict with a United States treaty is invalid (regardless of whether it is a state
law or a state constitutional provision).

26
Q

Treaty Power: Supreme Law - Self executing vs. Non self-executing treaties

A

Some treaties are expressly or impliedly self-executing (i.e., they are effective
without any implementation by Congress). Others are not effective unless and until
Congress passes legislation to effectuate their ends. If a treaty is not self-executing,
it is not treated as the supreme law of the land until Congress acts to effectuate
it, but the treaty itself can serve as an independent basis for Congress’s power to
adopt the required legislation (i.e., Congress need not point to one of its enumerated
powers, such as the commerce power, as the basis for the legislation).

27
Q

Treaty Power: Supreme Law - Self executing vs. Non self-executing treaties – President has no power to implement non self-executing treaties

A

Based on the Youngstown analysis (B.4., supra), the President generally does
not have any independent power to issue a “memorandum” ordering compliance
with a non‑self-executing treaty that has not been the subject of effectuating
legislation by Congress. [Medellin v. Texas, 552 U.S. 491 (2008)—President
had no power to enforce provisions of the Vienna Convention (a non-selfexecuting
international treaty) by issuing a memorandum requiring states to
grant habeas corpus petitions to reconsider convictions of criminals who are
foreign nationals and who were not informed at the time of their arrest of their
right to notify their consulate of their detention]

28
Q

Treaty Power: Supreme Law - Conflict with Congressional Acts

A

Valid treaties are on a “supremacy parity” with acts of Congress; a conflict between an act of Congress and a treaty is resolved by order of adoption - the last in time prevails

29
Q

Treaty Power: Supreme Law - Conflicts with Constitution

A

Treaties are not co-equal with the Constitution. For example, no treaty (or executive
agreement) could confer on Congress authority to act in a manner inconsistent
with any specific provision of the Constitution. [Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957)]

30
Q

Treaty Power: Other Limitations

A

Other substantive limitations on the treaty power have not been judicially established;
but in one case the Court expressed in dictum the view that a treaty could not upset the
basic structure of the United States’s federalism, or wield a power barred to the national
government by the Constitution, or cede any part of a state to a foreign nation without
the state’s consent. The Court has never held a treaty unconstitutional (Reid v. Covert,
supra, invalidated an executive agreement for violating the Fifth Amendment), but it
is conceivable that the treaty power extends only to subjects plausibly bearing on our
relations with other countries.

31
Q

Executive Agreements

A

The President’s power to enter into agreements (i.e., executive agreements) with the heads
of foreign countries is not expressly provided for in the Constitution; nevertheless, the power
has become institutionalized. Executive agreements can probably be on any subject as long
as they do not violate the Constitution. They are very similar to treaties, except that they do
not require the consent of the Senate.

32
Q

Executive Agreements: Conflicts with other governmental action

A

Executive agreements that are not consented to by the Senate are not the “supreme law
of the land.” Thus, conflicting federal statutes and treaties will prevail over an executive
agreement, regardless of which was adopted first. However, executive agreements
prevail over conflicting state laws.

33
Q

Executive Agreements: ex - power to settle claims of U.S. Citizens

A

The President, with the implicit approval of Congress, has power to settle claims of
United States citizens against foreign governments through an executive agreement.
[Dames & Moore v. Regan, 453 U.S. 654 (1981)]

34
Q

Is executive privilege derived from the constitution?

A

No. The executive privilege is not a constitutional power, but rather is an inherent privilege
necessary to protect the confidentiality of presidential communications.

35
Q

What is the extent of the executive privilege?

A

Presidential documents and conversations are presumptively privileged, but the privilege
must yield to the need for such materials as evidence in a criminal case to which
they are relevant and otherwise admissible. This determination must be made by the
trial judge after hearing the evidence.

36
Q

Executive Privilege: National Security Secrets

A

Military, diplomatic, or sensitive national security secrets are given great deference
by the courts.

37
Q

Executive Privilege: Criminal Proceedings

A

In criminal proceedings, presidential communiques will be available to the prosecution,
where a need for such information is demonstrated. [United States v. Nixon,
B.4., supra]

38
Q

Executive Privilege: Civil Trials

A

The Court has avoided ruling on the scope of executive privilege in a civil case.
Nevertheless, in Cheney v. United States District Court, 542 U.S. 367 (2004), the
Court noted that the need for information in a criminal case is “weightier,” and the
Executive’s withholding of information in a civil trial would not impair the judiciary’s
ability to fulfill its responsibility to resolve cases as much as in a criminal
trial. Thus, it appears that an Executive branch decision to withhold information
will be given more deference in a civil trial than in a criminal trial.

39
Q

Executive Privilege: Screening Papers and Recordings of Former President

A

A federal statute requiring the Administrator of General Services to screen presidential
papers is valid, notwithstanding the privilege. [Nixon v. Administrator of
General Services, 433 U.S. 425 (1977)]

40
Q

Executive Privilege: Screening by Judge in Chambers

A

The court will determine in an in-camera inspection which communications are
protected and which are subject to disclosure.

41
Q

Executive Immunity: Absolute Immunity for President

A

The President has absolute immunity from civil damages based on any action that the
President took within his official responsibilities (even if the action was only arguably
within the “outer perimeter” of presidential responsibility). [Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457
U.S. 731 (1982)] However, the President has no immunity from private suits in federal
courts based on conduct that allegedly occurred before taking office. [Clinton v.
Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997)] Rationale: The immunity is intended only to enable the
President to perform his designated functions without fear of personal liability.

42
Q

Executive Immunity: Immunity May Extend to Presidential Aides

A

Presidential aides share in this immunity only if they are exercising discretionary
authority for the President in “sensitive” areas of national concern, such as foreign
affairs. Other aides are entitled only to a qualified immunity (a “good faith” defense).
[Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982)]

43
Q

Impeachment: Persons Subject to Impeachment

A

The President, VP, and all civil officers of the U.S. are subject to impeachment.

44
Q

Impeachment: Grounds

A

The grounds for impeachment are treason, bribery, high crimes, and misdemeanors.

45
Q

Impeachment: Impeachment by the House

A

A majority vote in the House is necessary to invoke the charges of impeachment.

46
Q

Impeachment: Conviction by the Senate

A

A two-thirds vote in the Senate is necessary to convict.