Word: okanogan
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1929-1929
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...believed that the Supreme Court will find no difficulty in sustaining the President's "pocket veto" in the Okanogan case...
When is a "pocket veto" not a veto? is the question which the suit of the Okanogan Indians now presents for the first time to the Supreme Court. The issue thus raised has aroused interest rather from its novelty than from its intrinsic importance. A practice sanctioned by more than a century of usage now awaits authoritative interpretation by the court of last resort. If this is not enough to explain the CRIMSON's interest in the subject, then perhaps judicial cognizance might be taken of the fact that aspirants for editorial advancement are prone to secure copy by means...
...close of its first session the 69th Congress passed a bill conferring upon the Court of Claims jurisdiction to hear the suit of the Okanogan Indians. On July 3, 1926--less than ten days thereafter--the first session adjourned sine die. The President did not sign the bill, nor did he return it to Congress with his objections. Did the bill become a law? No, held the Court of Claims. Yes, contended counsel for the Indians, who appeal to the Supreme Court...
...when "the Congress by their Adjournment" prevent its return. Adjournment from day to day is clearly not such an occasion. Adjournment sine die would seem clearly to be a case where the bill could not be returned within ten days. A more difficult question--not directly presented in the Okanogan case--is the matter of adjournment for longer than ten days during the continuance of a session, as, e.g., over the Christmas holidays. The "pocket veto" is conditioned on this: that Congress by their action prevent etc. Unless we are to accuse Gouvernor Morris of careless draughting, we can scarcely...