Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: CharlesWayneCT
Exactly. It can be done.

Justice Scalia dissented:

Had the Line Item Veto Act authorized the President to "decline to spend" any item of spending contained in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, there is not the slightest doubt that authorization would have been constitutional. What the Line Item Veto Act does instead -- authorizing the President to "cancel" an item of spending -- is technically different. But the technical difference does not relate to the technicalities of the Presentment Clause, which have been fully complied with[.] Clinton, 524 U.S. 417, 469 (1998).

15 posted on 10/18/2007 9:26:50 AM PDT by redgirlinabluestate
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: redgirlinabluestate
That’s why Scalia was in the minority. Whooped 6-3 and rightly so.
19 posted on 10/18/2007 9:50:26 AM PDT by Leisler (Liberal (adj.) [lib-er-uh / lib-ruhl] 1. a narcissistic sufferer of grand delusions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson