| Venue: | SCOTUS |
| Facts: | Truman declines to use his power under the Taft-Hartley Act, and in order to forestall a strike, he seizes the steel industry in order to keep it running. |
| Posture: | The seizure is held unconstitutional at the district court. |
| Issue: | Was the president acting within his constitutional powers when he ordered the secretary of commerce to take possession of and operate most of the nation's steel mills? |
| Holding: | No. |
| Rule: | The president's orders must direct that a congressional policy be executed in a manner prescribed by congress. His duty is to see that the laws are faithfully executed. |
| Reasoning: | There's no law explicitly or implicitly authorizing the president to take possession of property, so there's no faithful execution of laws going on here. |
| Dicta: | Jackson (concurring): The president has tons of power-- the party
system gives him more power than the office itself, because
it can extend his control into other branches and allow him
to win politically what he cannot directly command. Also
the three categories of presidential action, as related to
presidential power (acting on congress's authorization/on
independent powers/in contradiction to congress).
Vinson (CJ, dissenting): This IS an implied consequence of repeat authorization and funding for military action in Korea. |