FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   280   281   282   283   284   285   286   287   288   289   290   291   292   293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304  
305   306   307   308   309   310   311   312   313   314   315   316   317   318   319   320   321   322   323   324   325   326   327   328   329   >>   >|  
titutional ground or another, the general power of Congress to regulate their subject matter in time of war was not disputed. Not until the Government sought to recover excessive profits realized on war contracts did the Supreme Court have occasion to affirm the broad authority of the National Government to mobilize the industrial resources of the nation in time of war. Using the power of Congress to conscript men for the armed forces as a measure of its power to regulate industry, the Court sustained the legislation, saying: "The Renegotiation Act was developed as a major wartime policy of Congress comparable to that of the Selective Service Act. The authority of Congress to authorize each of them sprang from its war powers. * * * With the advent of * * * [global] warfare, mobilized property in the form of equipment and supplies became as essential as mobilized manpower. Mobilization of effort extended not only to the uniformed armed services but to the entire population. Both Acts were a form of mobilization. The language of the Constitution authorizing such measures is broad rather than restrictive. * * * [It] * * * places emphasis upon the supporting as well as upon the raising of armies. The power of Congress as to both is inescapably express, not merely implied."[1268] DELEGATION OF LEGISLATIVE POWER IN WARTIME While insisting that, "in peace or in war it is essential that the Constitution be scrupulously obeyed, and particularly that the respective branches of the Government keep within the powers assigned to each,"[1269] the Supreme Court has recognized that in the conduct of a war delegations of power may be valid which would not be admissible in other circumstances. The cases in which this issue has been raised have been few in number. In one, the Selective Draft Law cases,[1270] the objection was dismissed without discussion. In a second, the price-fixing authority exercised by the Office of Price Administration during the second world war, was, on the issue of delegation of power, sustained by reference to peace time precedents.[1271] Where the war power has been the basis of decision, two different theories concerning its significance can be recognized. The first is that since the war power is an inherent power shared by the legislative and executive departments rather than an enumerated power granted to the former, Congress does not delegate _legislative_ power when it authorizes the President to exe
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   280   281   282   283   284   285   286   287   288   289   290   291   292   293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304  
305   306   307   308   309   310   311   312   313   314   315   316   317   318   319   320   321   322   323   324   325   326   327   328   329   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Congress

 

Government

 
authority
 

mobilized

 
recognized
 

Constitution

 

Selective

 
essential
 

powers

 

sustained


Supreme

 

regulate

 

legislative

 
scrupulously
 

insisting

 

raised

 
number
 

LEGISLATIVE

 

WARTIME

 

admissible


conduct
 

delegations

 
assigned
 
branches
 

circumstances

 
respective
 

obeyed

 

Office

 

inherent

 

shared


significance

 

theories

 

executive

 
departments
 

authorizes

 

President

 

delegate

 

enumerated

 

granted

 

decision


discussion

 

fixing

 
dismissed
 

objection

 

exercised

 

reference

 

precedents

 

delegation

 

Administration

 
forces