Search Details

Word: return (lookup in dictionary) (lookup stats)
Dates: during 1920-1929
Sort By: most recent first (reverse)


Usage:

...Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall...

Author: NO WRITER ATTRIBUTED | Title: Fairman Discusses Veto Case Now Before the Supreme Court | 3/18/1929 | See Source »

...difficulty inheres in the word "adjournment." It is the contention of counsel for the Indians that "only the final adjournment of the Congress prevents the return (and reconsideration) of a vetoed bill." That is to say, "adjournment" in the above clause means only adjournment by reason of the expiration of the mandate of the Congress, which occurs on March 4 in the odd-numbered years...

Author: NO WRITER ATTRIBUTED | Title: Fairman Discusses Veto Case Now Before the Supreme Court | 3/18/1929 | See Source »

...appear that "adjournment" may be not merely due to the expiration of the life of a Congress, but from day to day, or until a certain day, or sine die. The occasion upon whch an unsigned bill is "pocket vetoed" occurs 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...

Author: NO WRITER ATTRIBUTED | Title: Fairman Discusses Veto Case Now Before the Supreme Court | 3/18/1929 | See Source »

...member rose to share his view, and the House, recognizing that it was not a law, resolved that it be reenrolled and resubmitted. The Senate discussed the question but took no action. Senator Trumbull declared: "If we were not in session, and by our adjournment prevented its return, then...

Author: NO WRITER ATTRIBUTED | Title: Fairman Discusses Veto Case Now Before the Supreme Court | 3/18/1929 | See Source »

...Senate, he wrote to President Arthur: "A bill has passed both Houses of Congress and was presented for my signature after both Houses had adjourned until 5th of January. This is more than ten days, and, if it were now presented to you, you could not return it with your objections... It would seem to me as if the bill could not become a law constitutionally...

Author: NO WRITER ATTRIBUTED | Title: Fairman Discusses Veto Case Now Before the Supreme Court | 3/18/1929 | See Source »

Previous | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | Next