Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump · ¶152

Second, the dissent invokes Dames & Moore v. Regan, 453 U. S. 654 (1981). See post, at 382–383. At its heart, that case involved an executive order by President Reagan suspending certain claims by U. S. citizens against Iran as part of a settlement involving the release of American hostages held there. 453 U. S., at 675. Just as we do today, Dames & Moore held that the “terms of the IEEPA . . . d[id] not authorize” the President's actions. Ibid. Even so, the Court proceeded to uphold those actions anyway, and did so based in part on its view (right or wrong) that the President enjoyed some “ `independent' ” power to “enter into executive agreements” suspending certain claims. Id., at 678, 682– 683. So unlike our case, Dames & Moore again involved overlapping powers. Along the way, too, the Court emphasized (repeatedly) the “narrowness” of its decision and that it should not be taken to…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.