Train v. City of New York
 | |
| Argued November 12, 1974 Decided February 18, 1975 | |
|---|---|
| Full case name | Train v. City of New York |
| Citations | 420 U.S. [1] (more) 420 U.S. 35, 95 S. Ct. 839, 43 L. Ed. 2d 1 |
| Holding | |
| "The 1972 Amendments do not permit the Administrator to allot to the States under § 205(a) less than the entire amounts authorized to be appropriated by § 207. Pp. 420 U. S. 42-49." [2] | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | WHITE, joined by BURGER, BRENNAN, STEWART, MARSHALL, BLACKMUN, POWELL, and REHNQUIST |
| Concurrence | DOUGLAS |
Train v. City of New York, 420 U.S. 35, 95 S. Ct. 839, 43 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1975), was a case in the Supreme Court of the United States whose implications mean "[t]he president cannot frustrate the will of Congress by killing a program through impoundment."[1] This finding closed a potential loophole in the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 and required the president to carry out the full objectives or scope of programs for which budget authority is provided by the United States Congress.
The case itself had to do with the Richard Nixon Administration's view that it was not obligated to disburse all funds allocated by Congress to states seeking federal monetary assistance under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
See also
Notes
- ^ Presidential Powers - Power Of Impoundment, law.jrank.org, retrieved 2009-12-24
References
- Train-v-City-New-York, Cornell University Law School, retrieved 2009-12-24
.svg?lang=en){kind=small} | This United States government–related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |