Clinton v City of New York 1998

This Supreme Court case ruled that the Line Item Veto given to the President was unconstitutional under the Presentment Clause in the Constitution. It removed the power, given to the President from the Line Item Veto Act 1996. It is a power that numerous state governors still have.

Background to the Case:

Congress passed the Line Item Veto Act in 1996 which gave the President the power to veto certain provisions within legislation that they did not agree with. The Line Item Veto focussed on finance bills. The passage of the act was also controversial with many Democrats not supporting it, so much so that six Congressmen sued to prevent the use of the procedure.

The next case surrounding it were to do with injuries sustained by both potato growers and the City of New York through cancelled provisions within the Taxpayer Relief Act and Balanced Budget Act. Both claimed that when provisions were cancelled or vetoed it lead to problems in healthcare in New York and the tax benefits available to potato growers.

When in court the District Court ruled that the Line Item Veto was unconstitutional and was progressed to the Supreme Court.

The ruling:

The Supreme Court affirmed the judgement of the lower court saying that the Line Item Veto violates the Presentment Clause in the Constitution. The ruling split the Court significantly with some justices both concurring and dissenting on the judgement.

Despite the act being struck down, President George W Bush attempted to have it reinstated on the basis that it would remove wasteful spending. The proposed act was slightly different as it required a congressional vote on the item in question. The proposal failed to become law.