Premium
Dueling Decisions
Author(s) -
Hicks D. Bruce
Publication year - 1996
Publication title -
policy studies journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.773
H-Index - 69
eISSN - 1541-0072
pISSN - 0190-292X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1541-0072.1996.tb01627.x
Subject(s) - wright , supreme court , meaning (existential) , corporation , government (linguistics) , political science , foreign policy , law , law and economics , sociology , philosophy , epistemology , politics , history , linguistics , art history
In a government of divided powers, the respective roles of the president and Congress in determining American foreign policy often are disputed. Rival Supreme Court decisions on this matter, U.S. v. Curtiss‐Wright Export Corporation (1936), and Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952), were resurrected and argued with renewed vigor following the Iran‐contra affair. Despite attempts by the defenders of each decision to discredit or reinterpret the rival case, both decisions stand as reasonable, if incompatible, interpretations of constitutional meaning.