Judge Voids Line-Item Veto; High Court Ruling Expected

A federal judge on Thursday struck down the new Line Item Veto Act as unconstitutional, saying Congress had engaged in an “unauthorized surrender” of its lawmaking power to the president.

The ruling sets the stage for a final Supreme Court ruling on the issue later this year. The justices are likely to act within a few weeks to schedule arguments in the case so as to hand down a ruling by July.

For the first time, Congress in 1996 gave the president the authority to cancel spending items from larger funding bills. Before, the president’s only option was to sign the spending bill in its entirety or to veto it.

Armed with the new veto power, President Clinton removed 82 spending items last year from appropriation bills passed by Congress. They included 38 military construction projects.

While the vetoes will save the taxpayers $1.9 billion over the next five years, they angered many of the intended recipients of the funds, including New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani. Clinton removed a provision of a Medicaid bill that would have given the city a greater federal reimbursement for its cost of providing health care for the poor.

Giuliani and New York City sued, contending the line-item veto is unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan agreed Thursday and ruled that the act “disrupts the balance of powers” between Congress and the White House. While Congress may pass a law that gives the executive branch the power to write rules to enforce it, the Line Item Veto Act goes further and gives away Congress’ power over the purse, he said.

For Congress to give away the final authority over some spending, Hogan said, is “an unauthorized surrender to the president of an inherently legislative function.”

*

Thursday’s ruling was no surprise. Last year, another federal judge, voicing similar views, also struck down the Line Item Veto Act based on a lawsuit filed by several members of Congress.

However, the Supreme Court threw out that lawsuit on procedural grounds, ruling that the members of Congress did not suffer an “actual injury” and therefore did not have standing to sue.

Giuliani’s suit can proceed since his city lost money because of Clinton’s use of the line-item veto. The 1996 law calls for an expedited review by the Supreme Court, so the administration’s appeal will move directly to the high court.

Clinton said he was disappointed by Thursday’s ruling but predicted it will be only a temporary setback. “It’s my belief that, ultimately, the line-item veto will be ruled constitutional.”