Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Email
Answers.com

Dames & Moore v. Regan

 
US Supreme Court: Dames & Moore v. Regan

453 U.S. 654 (1981), argued 24 June 1981, decided 2 July 1981 by vote of 9 to 0; Rehnquist for the Court, Stevens concurring in part, Powell concurring in part and dissenting in part. This decision upheld certain actions taken by President Jimmy Carter in January 1981 to settle the controversy resulting from the seizure of American personnel as hostages at the American Embassy in Tehran, Iran, in 1979. To secure the hostages' release, the United States agreed with Iran to terminate legal proceedings in U.S. courts involving claims by U.S. nationals against Iran, to nullify attachments against Iranian property entered by U.S. courts to secure any judgments against Iran, and to transfer such claims from U.S. courts to a newly created arbitration tribunal. These agreements were implemented by executive orders.

The Court upheld these presidential actions against challenges that they were unauthorized by law. The Court concluded that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) authorized the president to nullify the attachments and to transfer Iranian assets. It also approved the suspension of claims filed in U.S. courts even though no specific statutory provision authorized that step. In so doing the Court relied on inferences drawn from related legislation, a history of congressional acquiescence in executive claims settlement practices, and past decisions recognizing broad executive authority.

This decision has been criticized for applying a too‐undemanding standard to the question of presidential power, in particular by relying on inferences from statutes that do not directly deal with certain subjects at hand and, especially, on legislative acquiescence in executive activity. On any view, this decision is an important recognition of broad presidential power in foreign relations.

See also Foreign Affairs and Foreign Policy; Presidential Emergency Powers.

— Thomas O. Sargentich

Search unanswered questions...
Enter a question here...
Search: All sources Community Q&A Reference topics
Wikipedia: Dames & Moore v. Regan
Top
Dames & Moore v. Regan
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued June 24, 1981
Decided July 2, 1981
Full case name Dames & Moore v. Donald T. Regan, Secretary of the Treasury, et al.
Citations 453 U.S. 654 (more)
101 S.Ct. 2972; 69 L.Ed.2d 918
Holding
Executive orders dissolving judgments and suspending pending civil claims against Iranian government were constitutional.
Court membership
Case opinions
Majority Rehnquist
Concurrence Stevens, in part
Concur/dissent Powell
Laws applied
IEEPA (50 U.S.C. §1702)

Dames & Moore v. Regan, 453 U.S. 654 (1981) was a United States Supreme Court case dealing with President Jimmy Carter's Executive Order 12170, which froze Iranian assets in the United States on November 14, 1979 in response to the Iran hostage crisis which began on November 4, 1979.

After the inauguration of Ronald Reagan on January 20, 1981, the Reagan Administration agreed with Iran to terminate legal proceedings in U.S. courts involving claims by U.S. nationals against Iran, to nullify attachments against Iranian property entered by U.S. courts to secure any judgments against Iran, and to transfer such claims from U.S. courts to a newly created arbitration tribunal. These agreements were implemented by executive orders.

The Supreme Court upheld these actions by Donald Regan, Treasury Secretary in the Reagan Administration, finding that these presidential actions were authorized by law by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The Supreme Court also approved the suspension of claims filed in U.S. courts even though no specific statutory provision authorized that step. In so doing the Court relied on inferences drawn from related legislation, a history of congressional acquiescence in executive claims settlement practices, and past decisions recognizing broad executive authority.

This decision has been criticized for applying a too‐undemanding standard to the question of presidential power, in particular by relying on inferences from statutes that do not directly deal with certain subjects at hand and, especially, on legislative acquiescence in executive activity. On any view, this decision is an important recognition of broad presidential power in foreign relations.

See also

External links

See The Legacy of Dames & Moore v. Regan: The Twilight Zone of Concurrent Authority Between the Executive and Congress, 79 Notre Dame L Rev 291 (2003).

Dames & Moore v. Regan (1981) at Find Law


 
 

 

Copyrights:

US Supreme Court. The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States. Copyright © 1992, 2005 by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.  Read more
Wikipedia. This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Dames & Moore v. Regan" Read more