ACL Chapter 4 pt 6

Chapter 4: Constitutional Underpinnings of the Presidency

Article I Powers and Presidential Immunity

• The discussion revolves around the degree of presidential immunity concerning civil lawsuits.

• The case emphasizes that the President does not automatically have immunity from civil lawsuits regarding private conduct.

• The separation of powers doctrine doesn't necessitate halting all private actions against the President during his term in office.

• The President must specify how a private lawsuit interferes with official duties and bear the burden of proof to justify postponement of proceedings.

• The court maintains that frivolous litigation against the President is not a substantial concern, and judges are capable of managing cases appropriately.

• Congress could enact legislation to provide more protection to the President.

United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corporation

• This landmark case examines Congressional delegation of power to the President, particularly in foreign affairs.

• Facts: The shall not sell arms to certain countries engaged in conflict, as per a Joint Resolution passed by Congress.

  • The President's proclamation followed this resolution, invoking powers that challenge the legality of Congressional power delegation to the Executive.

• Sutherland's Opinion:

  • The resolution affects foreign affairs, fundamentally separate from domestic powers.

  • The Constitution grants the federal government certain powers over foreign relations that were not transferred from states but from the Crown.

  • The President holds a unique position in foreign affairs where he must act independently without Congressional interference.

• This case establishes a precedent on presidential authority in international relations and decisions made without direct input from Congress.

Dames & Moore v. Regan

• Background: Tensions escalated following the Iranian revolution, leading to the seizure of the American embassy.

• Issues: Actions taken by President Carter to block Iranian assets and regulate claims against Iran.

• Chief Justice Rehnquist's Opinion:

  • The President's order was examined under the principle of checks and balances.

  • Relies heavily on Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer regarding the president's authority arising from Congressional action or explicit powers.

  • The President’s actions were presumed valid due to specific Congressional authorization under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

  • The court ruled that neither the Act's nullification of attachments nor the suspension of claims exceeded presidential authority.

  • The establishment of a Claims Tribunal was authorized as a diplomatic means to resolve disputes, showing executive power to negotiate settlements even without Congressional specific approval.

The Prize Cases

• Facts: Following the attack on Fort Sumter, President Lincoln's blockade of Southern ports faced legal challenges.

• The Court held that:

  • Congress alone can declare war, but the President must respond to invasion with military action.

  • Lincoln’s blockade was justified as necessary to protect the Union without prior Congressional approval.

• Emphasizes executive duty to protect national interests even amidst ambiguity in war declarations and the relationship between civilian and military powers.

Korematsu v. United States

• The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the military's relocation order for Japanese Americans.

• Significant issues include:

  • Race-based restrictions on civil liberties are subject to strict scrutiny.

  • The context of wartime decisions made under public necessity must be carefully examined, though racial animus is never justified.

• The verdict is controversial, viewed as a precedent for extensive executive power versus civil liberties during crises.