« Previous | Main | Next »

Bush, the Court and the Veto

January 03, 2007 6:53 PM

ABC's Jan Crawford Greenburg reports: In 1998 the Supreme Court struck down a line item veto law that gave the President power to delete specific spending provisions. The Court ruled 6-3 that the President did not have "unilateral power to change the text of duly enacted statutes." Justice Stevens, writing for the majority, said there is "no provision in the Constitution that authorizes the president to enact, to amend or to repeal statutes." The decision did not track along liberal-conservative lines: Justices Scalia and Breyer wrote strident dissents, joined by Justice O'Connor.

Today, Bush pressured the Senate to pass a new Line Item Veto Act that is slightly more deferential to Congress. It's less a veto than a delay. That difference is probably enough for the Court to uphold it.

Under the proposed law, President Bush could circle out items in the budget he found excessive, then demand Congress vote on them separately. If Congress refused to excise an offending item, Bush could make a political issue of it, but he couldn't knock it out.

But that, of course, assumes Congress would even pass it in the first place.

January 3, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (0)

User Comments

Post a comment

Name:

Email Address:

URL:

Remember personal info?

Comments: