In United States government, the line-item veto, or partial veto, is the power of an executive authority to nullify or cancel specific provisions of a bill, usually a budget appropriations bill, without vetoing the entire legislative package. The line-item vetoes are usually subject to the possibility of legislative override as are traditional vetoes.
The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was a United States federal law passed by the 104th United States Congress and signed into law by President Bill Clinton on September 21, 1996. It banned federal recognition of same-sex marriage by limiting the definition of marriage to the union of one man and one woman, and it further allowed states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages granted under the laws of other states.
A pocket veto is a legislative maneuver that allows a president or other official with veto power to exercise that power over a bill by taking no action, thus effectively killing the bill without affirmatively vetoing it. This depends on the laws of each country; the common alternative is that if the president takes no action a bill automatically becomes law.
The Contract with America was a legislative agenda advocated for by the Republican Party during the 1994 congressional election campaign. Written by Newt Gingrich and Dick Armey, and in part using text from former President Ronald Reagan's 1985 State of the Union Address, the Contract detailed the actions the Republicans promised to take if they became the majority party in the United States House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years. Many of the Contract's policy ideas originated at The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.
In legislative procedure, a rider is an additional provision added to a bill or other measure under the consideration by a legislature, which may or may not have much, if any, connection with the subject matter of the bill.
Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417 (1998), was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held, 6–3, that the line-item veto, as granted in the Line Item Veto Act of 1996, violated the Presentment Clause of the United States Constitution because it impermissibly gave the President of the United States the power to unilaterally amend or repeal parts of statutes that had been duly passed by the United States Congress. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the six-justice majority that the line-item veto gave the President power over legislation unintended by the Constitution, and was therefore an overstep in their duties.
Impoundment is an act by a President of the United States of not spending money that has been appropriated by the U.S. Congress. Thomas Jefferson was the first president to exercise the power of impoundment in 1801. The power was available to all presidents up to and including Richard Nixon, and was regarded as a power inherent to the office. The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 was passed in response to perceived abuse of the power under President Nixon. The Act removed that power, and Train v. City of New York, closed potential loopholes in the 1974 Act. The president's ability to indefinitely reject congressionally approved spending was thus removed.
Budget reconciliation is a special parliamentary procedure of the United States Congress set up to expedite the passage of certain budgetary legislation in the United States Senate. The procedure overrides the filibuster rules in the Senate, which may otherwise require a 60-vote supermajority for passage by the Senate. Bills described as reconciliation bills can pass the Senate by a simple majority of 51 votes or 50 votes plus the Vice President's as the tie-breaker. The reconciliation procedure also applies to the House of Representatives, but it has minor significance there, as the rules of the House of Representatives do not have a de facto supermajority requirement. Due to greater polarization, gridlock, and filibustering in the Senate in recent years, budget reconciliation has come to play an important role in how the United States Congress legislates.
Thomas Francis Hogan is a Senior United States district judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, who served as director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts from October 17, 2011, until June 30, 2013.
Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, 546 U.S. 320 (2006), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States involving a facial challenge to New Hampshire's parental notification abortion law. The First Circuit had ruled that the law was unconstitutional and an injunction against its enforcement was proper. The Supreme Court vacated this judgment and remanded the case, but avoided a substantive ruling on the challenged law or a reconsideration of prior Supreme Court abortion precedent. Instead, the Court only addressed the issue of remedy, holding that invalidating a statute in its entirety "is not always necessary or justified, for lower courts may be able to render narrower declaratory and injunctive relief."
The Presentment Clause of the United States Constitution outlines federal legislative procedure by which bills originating in Congress become federal law in the United States.
Charles J. "Chuck" Cooper is an appellate attorney and litigator in Washington, D.C., where he is a founding member and chairman of the law firm Cooper & Kirk, PLLC. He was named by The National Law Journal as one of the 10 best civil litigators in Washington. The New York Times described him as "one of Washington’s best-known lawyers." He has represented prominent American political figures, including Attorney General Jeff Sessions, in response to the alleged Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections; Attorney General John Ashcroft; and former National Security Adviser and United States Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton.
Raines v. Byrd, 521 U.S. 811 (1997), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held individual members of Congress do not automatically have standing to litigate the constitutionality of laws affecting Congress as a whole.
William Orton was an American Democratic politician who served as a member of the United States House of Representatives from Utah from 1991 to 1997.
The Credit Union Membership Access Act is an Act for the United States government that amended the Federal Credit Union Act in 1998. The bill was proposed on the heels of the Supreme Court decision in NCUA v. First National Bank & Trust against the National Credit Union Administration, a key victory in the American Bankers Association's legislative agenda and a major setback to credit unions. The Act reversed this ruling, authorizing credit unions to have multiple common bonds among their memberships.
A filibuster is a tactic used in the U.S. Senate to delay or block a vote on a measure by preventing debate on it from ending. The Senate's rules place few restrictions on debate; in general, if no other senator is speaking, a senator who seeks recognition is entitled to speak for as long as they wish. Only when debate concludes can the measure be put to a vote. Rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate allows the Senate to vote to limit debate by invoking cloture on the pending question. In most cases, however, this requires a majority of three-fifths of senators duly chosen and sworn, so a minority of senators can block a measure, even if it has the support of a simple majority.
The self-executing rule, also known as "deem and pass", is procedural measure used by the United States Congress to approve a legislative rule that contains such a provision, the House of Representatives then deems a second piece of legislation as approved without requiring a separate vote, as long as it is specified in the rule. That is, if the vote on the rule passes, then the second piece of legislation is passed as part of the rule vote.
The line-item veto, also called the partial veto, is a special form of veto power that authorizes a chief executive to reject particular provisions of a bill enacted by a legislature without vetoing the entire bill. Many countries have different standards for invoking the line-item veto if it exists at all. Each country or state has its own particular requirement for overriding a line-item veto.
The Ninetieth Minnesota State Senate v. Dayton,, was a 2017 Minnesota Supreme Court case where the Court ruled that Governor Mark Dayton's line item vetoes of appropriations for the Minnesota Senate and Minnesota House of Representatives were a lawful exercise of his authority granted by the Minnesota Constitution. The Court also ruled that since the state legislature had access to other funding to continue operating as a fully functioning and independent branch of government, the governor's vetoes did not effectively abolish the legislature and thereby violate Article III of the state constitution. The Court also ruled that the judicial branch did not have the constitutional authority to order funding without a corresponding budgetary appropriation. The Supreme Court's ruling overturned an earlier ruling by a Ramsey County District Court judge. The case marked the first time in which the Minnesota Supreme Court was asked to resolve a lawsuit brought by one branch of government against another.
In the United States, the president can use the veto power to prevent a bill passed by the Congress from becoming law. Congress can override the veto by a two-thirds vote of both chambers.
