Constitutional Law.

Brief the Following Cases for week 5 use and cite your book. (Book notes are provided)American Constitutional Law 6th EditionStephens, Jr., Otis H.,Stephens, Jr., Otis,Scheb, II, John M.,Scheb, II, John,Glennon, ColinEdition6th EditionISBN9781305147126PLEASE BRIEF THIS CASE : J.W. Hampton & Company v. United States (1928) p. 295CHAPTER 5 PG.295 (Case Notes)J. W. HAMPTON & COMPANY v. UNITED STATES276 U.S. 394; 48 S.Ct. 348; 72 L.Ed. 624 (1928) Vote: 9–0In this case, the Court considers the issue of delegation of legislative power to the Executive in the context of a “flexible tariff provision.” Mr. Chief Justice Taft delivered the opinion of the Court J. W. Hampton, Jr. & Company made an importation into New York of barium dioxide which the collector of customs assessed at the dutiable rate of 6 cents per pound. This was 2 cents per pound more than that fixed by statute…. The rate was raised by the collector by virtue of the proclamation of the President … issued under … authority of … the Tariff Act of September 21, 1922, … which is the so-called flexible tariff provision. Protest was made and an appeal was taken…. The case came … before the United States customs court…. A majority held the action constitutional. Thereafter the case was appealed to the United States court of customs appeals. On the16th day of October 1926, the Attorney General certified that in his opinion the case was of such importance as to render expedient its review by this court. Thereafter the judgment of the United States customs court was affirmed. The issue here is as to the constitutionality of [the Tariff Act] upon which depends the authority for the proclamation of the President and for 2 of the 6 cents per pound duty collected from [J. W. Hampton]. The contention of the taxpayers is … that the section is invalid in that it is a delegation to the President of the legislative power, which by Article 1, Sec. 1 of the Constitution, is vested in Congress, the power being that declared in Sec. 8 of Article 1, that the Congress hall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, im-posts, and excises….… It seems clear what Congress intended by [the act]. Its plan was to secure by law the imposition of customs duties on articles of imported merchandise which should equal the difference between the cost of producing in a foreign country the articles in question and laying them down for sale in the United States, and the cost of producing and selling like or similar articles in the United States, so that the duties not only secure revenue but at the same time enable domestic producers to compete on terms of equality with foreign producers in the markets of the United States. It may be that it is difficult to fix with exactness this difference, but the difference which is sought in the statute is perfectly clear and perfectly intelligible. Be-cause of the difficulty in practically determining what that difference is, Congress seems to have doubted that the information in its possession was such as to enable it to make the adjustment accurately, and also to have apprehended that with changing conditions the difference might vary in such a way that some readjustments would be necessary to give effect to the principle on which the statute proceeds. To avoid such difficulties, Congress adopted … the method of describing with clearness what its policy and plan was and then authorizing a member of the executive branch to carry out its policy and plan and to find the changing difference from time to time and to make the adjustments necessary to conform the duties to the standard underlying that policy and plan. As it was a matter of great importance, it concluded to give by statute to the President … the function of determining the difference as it might vary….The well-known maxim delegate a protest as non protest delegari [“that which is delegated cannot be redelegated”], applicable to the law of agency in the general and common law, is well understood and has had a wider application in the construction of our Federal and state Constitutions than it has in private law. Our Federal Constitution and state Constitutions of this country divide the governmental power into three branches. The first is the legislative, the second is the executive, and the third is the judicial, and the rule is that in the actual administration of the government Congress or the legislature should exercise the legislative power, the President or the state executive, the governor, the executive power, and the courts or the judiciary the judicial power, and in carrying out that constitutional division into three branches it is a breach of the national fundamental law if Congress gives up its legislative power and transfers it to the President, or to the judicial branch, or if by law it attempts to invest itself or its members with either executive power or judicial power. This is not to say that the three branches are not coordinate parts of one go

Last Completed Projects