4. What did the Supreme Court say about the powers of the President to act in the national interest in the cases of United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. and Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. v. Sawyer?
The U.S Constitution gives the executive branch and its head, the President, many enumerated powers to carry out the functions of governance. Those functions include the execution and enforcement of law, war powers, the power of veto, and the ability to act as a representative of the United States in international affairs. It is unsurprising then that these powers often come into conflict with the functions and jurisdictions of the other two branches of government. The Curtiss-Wright Export Corporation thought that such a conflict had occurred in a case regarding a presidential action that prevented them from shipping and selling arms to the warring nations of Bolivia and Paraguay. In the United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp, the defendant corporation rejected the prohibitive action claiming that the delegation of commerce powers to the President was invalid because it was an unconstitutional action. They claimed that the action was unconstitutional because it violated the non-delegation doctrine of Article I Section 1 of the U.S Constitution. The case reached the Supreme Court where the Court found that Congress …show more content…
The joint resolution allows for the President to exercise “all necessary and appropriate force.” President George W. Bush takes advantage of an off shore naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The President and his administration believed that since the naval base wasn’t technically on U.S soil, the laws of the U.S would instead be replaced by use of military commissions. The stated purpose for the use of Guantanamo was to prevent the captured from returning to battle while the conflict
The U.S Constitution gives the executive branch and its head, the President, many enumerated powers to carry out the functions of governance. Those functions include the execution and enforcement of law, war powers, the power of veto, and the ability to act as a representative of the United States in international affairs. It is unsurprising then that these powers often come into conflict with the functions and jurisdictions of the other two branches of government. The Curtiss-Wright Export Corporation thought that such a conflict had occurred in a case regarding a presidential action that prevented them from shipping and selling arms to the warring nations of Bolivia and Paraguay. In the United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp, the defendant corporation rejected the prohibitive action claiming that the delegation of commerce powers to the President was invalid because it was an unconstitutional action. They claimed that the action was unconstitutional because it violated the non-delegation doctrine of Article I Section 1 of the U.S Constitution. The case reached the Supreme Court where the Court found that Congress …show more content…
The joint resolution allows for the President to exercise “all necessary and appropriate force.” President George W. Bush takes advantage of an off shore naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The President and his administration believed that since the naval base wasn’t technically on U.S soil, the laws of the U.S would instead be replaced by use of military commissions. The stated purpose for the use of Guantanamo was to prevent the captured from returning to battle while the conflict