Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 8 фев 2025
  • Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► www.quimbee.co...
    Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha | 462 U.S. 919 (1983)
    In Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha, the Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of the legislative veto. Congress commonly used legislative vetoes to supervise and control administrative agencies to which it delegated authority. Legislative vetoes allowed either house of Congress to overrule an agency action with a simple majority vote.
    The House of Representatives exercised a legislative veto in an immigration case involving Chadha. Chadha was an East Indian from Kenya. He’d entered the United States lawfully in 1966, but remained after his visa expired in 1972. An immigration judge ordered that Chadha’s deportation be suspended, because Chadha met the statutory requirements to stay in the United States.
    Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here www.quimbee.co...
    The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► www.quimbee.co...
    Have Questions about this Case?
    Submit your questions and get answers from real attorney here: www.quimbee.co...
    Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:
    Subscribe to our RUclips Channel ► www.youtube.co...
    Quimbee Case Brief App ► www.quimbee.co...
    Facebook ► / quimbeedotcom
    Twitter ► / quimbeedotcom
    casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries

Комментарии • 8

  • @malghamdi5054
    @malghamdi5054 6 лет назад +8

    way better than the book we read

  • @RiianxD
    @RiianxD 7 лет назад +7

    Very in depth and helpful, thank you.

  • @mistersauga716
    @mistersauga716 5 лет назад +6

    As a matter of policy legislative veto is a good idea as it allows elected bodies to closely exercise executive oversight. But it violates the separation of powers

  • @ivicapavic3381
    @ivicapavic3381 3 года назад +1

    Thanks, very helpful.

  • @JosephHeathhotdang
    @JosephHeathhotdang 4 года назад +1

    Awesome, thank you

  • @abrahamcaro3144
    @abrahamcaro3144 3 года назад +2

    Is this the same dude from the infographics show

  • @vanessabaez6692
    @vanessabaez6692 5 лет назад +1

    I was INS.