Test 3 Flashcards
what section of the constitution is the Recess Appointment clause in
Art 2 Sec 2
what is the recess appointment clause
allows the president to appoint officers when senate is not “in session”
when do the recess appointments end
at the end of the next session (could be 2 years)
what case goes with recess appointments
Noel canning v NLRB 2014
what are the facts of Noel Canning v NLRB 2014 (recess appointment)
- recess appointments to national relations board by obama
- 3/5 were filled by obama
- Noel canning sues saying they were not made correctly
what is the holding in Noel canning v NLRB 2014
- court holds that for recess clause to kick in senate must be in recess for more than 10 days (senate had only been in recess for 3 days)
where is the pardoning power clause in the constitution
Art 2 Sec 2
what are the only limitations to the pardoning power
- impeachment cases
- has to be federal offenses NOT STATE
when can a pardon happen
- at any time (before an investigation all the way to sentencing)
what are the cases regarding pardoning power
- EX Parte Grossman 1925
- Murphy v Ford
what are the facts of EX Parte Grossman 1925 (pardoning power)
- person was tried during prohibition for breaking drinking laws
- judge held in contempt for violating court order (sentenced to 1 year 1k fine)
- president coolidge issues pardon reducing sentence and just paying fine
- judge says it interferes with separation of powers
what is the issue in EX Parte Grossman
- is order of contempt under the pardon clause
what is the holding in EX parte grossman
- yes the pardon clause covers people being held in contempt
what is the rationale of Ex Parte Grossman
- founders thought it was wise to put president as last resort for mercy
- king of england was able to use this same power for contempt of court orders which is what our law is based off of
- have to trust the president will not abuse it
what are the facts of Murphy v Ford
- Nixon retires after watergate scandal
- ford pardons him after taking office prior to any actual conviction
what is the issue for Murphy v Ford (pardoning)
can the president pardon prior to conviction
what is the holding/rationale in Murphy v Ford
- Yes the president can pardon prior to conviction
- per supreme court decision in EX Parte garland the pardoning power is unlimited
- pardon should be used to allow a
“country to move on”
what amount of the senate is required to complete treaties
2/3
since a president might not have the votes to enter into a treaty through congress what might they decide to do
enter into an executive agreement (can be taken away by future admins)
what are the 2 types of domestic dispute cases in con law
- delegation cases
- usurpation cases
what are delegation cases for domestic disputes
when one branch delegates functions, that are assigned to it, to another branch (congress gives power to president)
what are usurpation cases in domestic disputes
when one branch tries to take the functions assigned to another branch in the constitution (president does something given to congress)
with regarding delegation cases why should we care if congress gives away its power
- they are the elected part of government
- if they delegate power there is no check to remove those people they give the power to
when has the court allowed delegations
- when there is an intelligible principle
what does intelligible principle standard mean regarding congresses delegation of powers
- congress have to give the person they are delegating to guidance on how to complete the task
- doesn’t allow congress to be totally off the hook
what case sets forth the intelligible principle standard
Hampton vs US
what are the facts of Mistretta V US (delegation case)
- congress was worried about inequality in federal sentencing
- passed a sentencing reform act
- created a commission OF JUDGES to make guidelines
- mistretta is tried under these guidlines
what is the issue in mistretta v US
did the sentencing reform act give the commission excessive legislative authority
what is the holding in Mistretta v US
they held the sentencing guidelines were constitutional
what was the rationale in Mistretta v US
-satisfied the intelligible principle standard
what was the dissent in Mistretta v US
-scalia
- violated separation of powers since a judicial body was creating legislation
-allows congress to pass something they do not want to do onto a “commission”
what are the 2 cases dealing with usurpation cases
- INS v Chadha
- Bowsher v Synar
what are the facts of INS v Chadha
- chadha overstayed his visa
- statute that allowed a hearing for overstaying
- judge allowed chadha to stay and told AG and AG told congress
-congress objected to this (legislative veto)
what is the issue in INS v Chadha
- can congress “second guess” and interfere with the enforcement of immigration laws
what is the holding on INS v Chadha
no congress are improperly impeding on the executive branch powers
what is the rationale in INS v Chadha
- congress does not have control over AG he is an executive agent
- only way they could prevent him from being deported is if they passed a law
- bicameralism and presentment is violated when congress votes on if they should execute the law
what is the dissent in INS v Chadha
- justice white
- congress writes the law and this is an effective way to make sure they are implemented
- court is being too formalistic (veto was used prior)