INS v. ChadhaPosted on October 24, 2012  |  Constitutional Law  |  Tags:  Constitutional Law Case Brief

FACTS

An immigration law passed by Congress holds that the attorney general can suspend the deportation of an illegal immigrant if the immigrant would sustain “severe hardship” as a result.  Additionally, if either the Senate or House of Representatives voted by majority to veto the attorney general’s decision regarding deportation.  Chadha was a student who had remained in the US with an expired Visa.  The attorney general held that he should remain in the US due to hardship.  The House of Representatives vetoed the decision to grant amnesty, thereby sustaining the deportation order.  Chadha brought this litigation after the legislative veto.

ISSUE

Whether a single house can vote to override an executive decision such that it violates the principle of separation of powers.

HOLDING

Yes, Act invalidated.  The court recognize the argument of “efficiency” regarding a single house vote.  Efficiency is achieved by this measure because the attorney general may frequently override deportation and calling both houses of the legislature to vote for each instance would be time consuming and burdensome.  However, the constitution is very clear that legislative decisions are to be bicameral.  There are reasons relating to fair representation of states that maintain this justification as paramount, particularly when weighed against arguments of efficiency.   The act of overriding an executive veto is inherently legislative and therefore requires bicameral, legislative support.

INS v. Chadha

Share on facebookShare on emailShare on print|More Sharing ServicesMore

View this case and other resources at:

Citation. 462 U.S. 919, 103 S. Ct. 2764, 77 L. Ed. 2d 317, 1983 U.S. 80.

Brief Fact Summary. Pursuant to the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), which authorized

either House of Congress to invalidate and suspend deportation rulings of the United States Attorney

General (Attorney General), the House of Representatives (the House) suspended an immigration

judge’s deportation ruling regarding Chadha.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. Where the House takes actions that have the purpose and effect of

altering legal rights, duties, or relations of persons outside of the legislative branch, bicameralism

and presentment are required.

Facts. Chadha overstayed his student visa and was asked to show cause why he should not be deported. After a hearing, the immigration judge ordered that Chadha’s deportation be suspended on the grounds that he would suffer “extreme hardship” if deported. Under the Act, once the Attorney General’s recommendation for suspension of a deportation was conveyed to Congress, the House had the power to veto the Attorney General’s determination. After the House veto of the Attorney General’s decision to allow Chadha to remain in the United States, Chadha was deported. Since the House action was pursuant to the Act, the resolution was not submitted to the Senate or presented to the President.

Issue. Was the part of the Act authorizing a “one House veto” constitutional?

Held. No. The Act violated explicit constitutional standards of lawmaking and congressional

authority.

The House took action that had the purpose and effect of altering the legal rights, duties and

regulations of persons, including the Attorney General, Executive Branch officials and Chadha, all

outside of the legislative branch. When the House takes such actions it must comply with the

requirements of Article I regarding bicameralism and presentment.

Congress made a deliberate choice to delegate to the Executive Branch, the authority to allow

deportable aliens to remain in this country in certain specified circumstances. Congress may

delegate authority, but once it does so it must abide by its decision until that delegation is

legislatively altered or revoked.

Dissent. Justice Byron White (J. White) stated that this decision sounds the death knell for nearly

200 other statutory provisions for which Congress retains a legislative veto. The Supreme Court of

the United States (Supreme Court) should have decided this case on the narrower grounds of

separation of powers.

Concurrence. Justice Lewis Powell (J. Powell) stated that the House’s action raises the very danger

the Framers sought to avoid – the exercise of unchecked power. In deciding whether Chadha should

be deported, Congress is not subject to any internal constraints that prevent it from acting arbitrarily

to deprive him of his right to remain in this country.

Discussion. The student must be cognizant of the nature of Congress’ actions. If they are legislative in nature than Congress must comply with the constitutional requirements of bicameralism and presentment