Lawless Policy: Tarp as Congressional Failure

J. Samples
{"title":"Lawless Policy: Tarp as Congressional Failure","authors":"J. Samples","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1572595","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The U.S. Constitution vests all the \"legislative powers\" it grants in Congress. The Supreme Court allows Congress to delegate some authority to executive officials provided an \"intelligible principle\" guides such transfers. Congress quickly wrote and enacted the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 in response to a financial crisis. The law authorized the secretary of the Treasury to spend up to $700 billion purchasing troubled mortgage assets or any financial instrument in order to attain 13 different goals. Most of these goals lacked any concrete meaning, and Congress did not establish any priorities among them. As a result, Congress lost control of the implementation of the law and unconstitutionally delegated its powers to the Treasury secretary. Congress also failed in the case of EESA to meet its constitutional obligations to deliberate, to check the other branches of government, or to be accountable to the American people. The implementation of EESA showed Congress to be largely irrelevant to policymaking by the Treasury secretary. These failures of Congress indicate that the current Supreme Court doctrine validating delegation of legislative powers should be revised to protect the rule of law and separation of powers.","PeriodicalId":166493,"journal":{"name":"Legislation & Statutory Interpretation eJournal","volume":"94 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Legislation & Statutory Interpretation eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1572595","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

The U.S. Constitution vests all the "legislative powers" it grants in Congress. The Supreme Court allows Congress to delegate some authority to executive officials provided an "intelligible principle" guides such transfers. Congress quickly wrote and enacted the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 in response to a financial crisis. The law authorized the secretary of the Treasury to spend up to $700 billion purchasing troubled mortgage assets or any financial instrument in order to attain 13 different goals. Most of these goals lacked any concrete meaning, and Congress did not establish any priorities among them. As a result, Congress lost control of the implementation of the law and unconstitutionally delegated its powers to the Treasury secretary. Congress also failed in the case of EESA to meet its constitutional obligations to deliberate, to check the other branches of government, or to be accountable to the American people. The implementation of EESA showed Congress to be largely irrelevant to policymaking by the Treasury secretary. These failures of Congress indicate that the current Supreme Court doctrine validating delegation of legislative powers should be revised to protect the rule of law and separation of powers.
无法无天的政策:Tarp是国会的失败
美国宪法赋予国会的所有“立法权”。最高法院允许国会将一些权力委托给行政官员,前提是要有一个“可理解的原则”来指导这种移交。为应对金融危机,国会迅速起草并颁布了《2008年紧急经济稳定法案》。该法案授权财政部长花费7,000亿美元购买不良抵押贷款资产或任何金融工具,以实现13个不同的目标。这些目标大多缺乏具体意义,国会也没有确定其中的优先事项。结果,国会失去了对法律实施的控制,并违宪地将其权力授予了财政部长。在EESA案中,国会也未能履行宪法规定的审议义务,未能制约其他政府部门,未能对美国人民负责。EESA的实施表明,国会在很大程度上与财政部长的政策制定无关。国会的这些失败表明,应该修改目前最高法院认可立法权授权的原则,以保护法治和三权分立。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信