Search Results

A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corporation v. United States
Content Type: Brief

View this case and other resources at: Citation. 295 U.S. 495, 55 S. Ct. 837, 9 L. Ed. 1570, 1935 U.S. Brief Fact Summary. Congress delegated authority to an executive agency to regulate various industries. In turn, the President of the United States (the President) redelegated that power to business groups and boards of various industries, to create industry wide codes of conduct. The Defendant, A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corporation (Defendant), was indicted for violating one of the codes. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Congress may not delegate law-making authority to an executiv ...

Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan
Content Type: Brief

View this case and other resources at: Citation. 293 U.S. 388, 55 S. Ct. 241, 79 L. Ed. 446, 1935 U.S. Brief Fact Summary. Congress delegated to the President of the United States (the President) the power to restrict or prohibit the interstate and foreign transport of petroleum. Synopsis of Rule of Law. It is a violation of the separation of powers doctrine for Congress to delegate law-making authority to the President without imposing standards or rules limiting that authority. ...

Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer
Content Type: Brief

View this case and other resources at: Citation. 343 U.S. 579, 72 S. Ct. 863, 6 L. Ed. 1153, 1952 U.S. Brief Fact Summary. Steel workers threatened to strike and shutdown all steel mills throughout the United States. To avoid this potential harm to the national defense, the President issued an executive order placing control of all mills in the hands of the Secretary of Commerce. Synopsis of Rule of Law. The President is limited to vetoing and suggesting laws; he is not to create laws. ...

United States v. Richard M. Nixon, President of the United States
Content Type: Brief

View this case and other resources at: Citation. 506 U.S. 224, 113 S. Ct. 732, 122 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1993) Brief Fact Summary. The Plaintiff, the President of the United States Richard Nixon (Plaintiff) refused to turn over tapes of his secretly recorded conversations that had been subpoenaed to assist in the prosecution of individuals in the Watergate break-in. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Conversations between the President of the United States (the President) and his advisors are generally privileged, but that privilege is no absolute. ...

William J. Clinton, President of the United States v. City of New York
Content Type: Brief

View this case and other resources at: Citation. 524 U.S. 417, 118 S. Ct. 2091, 41 L. Ed. 2d 393, 1998 U.S. Brief Fact Summary. The Defendant, the President of the United States, William Clinton (Defendant) used his newly acquired Line Item Veto Power to cancel two items of congressional spending. The Plaintiffs the City of New York and various others (Plaintiffs) and the intended recipients of the vetoed spending sued. Synopsis of Rule of Law. The Line Item Veto Power is unconstitutional. ...

Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents
Content Type: Brief

View this case and other resources at: Citation. 528 U.S. 62, 120 S. Ct. 631, 145 L. Ed. 2d 522, 2000 U.S. Brief Fact Summary. The Petitioners, including Kimel (Petitioners), brought suit against the Respondents, the Florida Board of Regents (Respondents), a state employer under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA). Respondents argued that the ADEA does not effectively abrogate their sovereign immunity. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Legislation must be congruent and proportional to a legitimate end to abrogate sovereign immunity under Section: 5 of the Fourteen ...

Alden v. Maine
Content Type: Brief

View this case and other resources at: Citation. 527 U.S. 706, 119 S. Ct. 2240, 144 L. Ed. 2d 636, 1999 U.S. Brief Fact Summary. The Petitioners, a group of probation officers (Petitioners), brought suit in Maine State Court, alleging that their employer, the State of Maine (Respondent) violated overtime provisions of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"). Synopsis of Rule of Law. State sovereign immunity prevents a non-consenting state from being sued in state court for violations of federal law. ...

Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer
Content Type: Brief

View this case and other resources at: Citation. 427 U.S. 445, 96 S. Ct. 2666, 49 L. Ed. 2d 614, 1976 U.S. Brief Fact Summary. In 1972, Congress amended Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (the Act), authorizing private suits for monetary damages. In doing so, Congress cited its authority under Section: 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment (Section:5 of the Fourteenth Amendment) of the United States Constitution (Constitution). Synopsis of Rule of Law. Congress may authorize private suits against states under Section: 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment that are impermissible in ot ...

Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida
Content Type: Brief

View this case and other resources at: Citation. 517 U.S. 44, 116 S. Ct. 1114, 134 L. Ed. 2d 252, 1996 U.S. Brief Fact Summary. Petitioners brought suit under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, which authorizes suits against state governments to enforce good faith negotiations with tribes attempting to allow gambling on reservations. Synopsis of Rule of Law. The Indian Commerce Clause does not allow Congress to abrogate state sovereign immunity. ...

Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board v. College Savings Bank and United States
Content Type: Brief

View this case and other resources at: Citation. 527 U.S. 627, 119 S. Ct. 2199, 144 L. Ed. 2d 575, 1999 U.S. Brief Fact Summary. The Respondent, College Savings Bank (Respondent), brought suit against a Florida state agency, alleging infringement of a patent it holds, under the Patent and Plant Variety Protection Remedy Clarification Act (Patent Remedy Act). Synopsis of Rule of Law. Congress may not abrogate state sovereign immunity in patent infringement cases under Section: 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution (Constitution). ...