less than 1 minute read

Raines v. Byrd

Significance, Political Ironies, Not A "case" Or "controversy", Counter-arguments In The Constitution And Coleman


Frederick D. Raines, Director, U.S. Office of Management and Budget, et al.


Senator Robert Byrd, et al.

Appellant's Claim

That appellees lacked standing to challenge the recently passed Line Item Veto Act.

Chief Lawyer for Appellant

Walter E. Dellinger, U.S. Solicitor General

Chief Lawyer for Appellee

Alan Morrison

Justices for the Court

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Anthony M. Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, William H. Rehnquist (writing for the Court), Antonin Scalia, David H. Souter, Clarence Thomas

Justices Dissenting

Stephen Breyer, John Paul Stevens


Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

26 June 1997


That the appellees lacked standing for their case under Article III, section II, of the Constitution, which authorizes the judicial branch to review only "cases" and "controversies." Since appellees could not "allege a personal injury that is particularized, concrete, and otherwise judicially cognizable," the case had to be vacated.

Related Cases

  • The Pocket Veto Case, 279 U.S. 655 (1929).
  • Coleman v. Miller, 307 U.S. 433 (1939).
  • Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969).
  • Allen v. Wright, 468 U.S. 737 (1984).
  • Clinton v. City of New York, 188 S.Ct. 2091 (1998).

Additional topics

Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1995 to Present