Ask the Scholar
Page 39 of 39
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
34
statements have appeared in lower court opinions in World War II.
No case has been discovered from either World War I or II casting any
doubt, even in dietum, on the existence of the executive authority.
CONCLUSION
In the light of the foregoing considerations the following
conclusions are indicated. When the time comes to support the proposed
order in the Courts, its defense should be based on the inherent
constitutional powers of the President, stemning directly from Article II.
No reliance should be placed upon alternative statutory grounds. Although
the question has been debated since the beginning of the republic,
the inherent executive power is probably broad enough to support the
action taken, and it may leave open the possibility of contending that
the Government is not liable for just compensation. Whether that
TRUMAN
defense would be "open depends, of course, upon whether the degree
the ARCHIVES "NATIONAL RECORDS ADMIN." & GOOD
of dominion exercised in the seizure falls short of that in the
COVERAGE
Pewee litigation.
34 Ken-Had Tube às Lemp Corp. V. Badeau, 55 F. Supp. 195, 197 (W.D.
Ky.), involving seizure of a plant; Alpirn V. Huffman, 49 F. Supp. 337,
340 (D. Neb.), involving requisition of scrap.
36,
-39-
Page data
- Page
- 39
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- photo
- Media ID
- 3c390d8165a589a8
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 122660132
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "122660132",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/122660132",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Memorandum to Assistant Attorney General Holmes Baldridge",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/122660132",
"collections": [
"David H. Stowe Papers",
"Subject Files"
],
"subjects": [
"Labor disputes",
"Executive power"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/201193/5664985/5664985-26-01.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/201193/5664985/5664985-26-01.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/201193/5664985/5664985-26-01.jpg",
"imageCount": 39,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "122660132",
"label": "Memorandum to Assistant Attorney General Holmes Baldridge",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/122660132"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "122660132",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/122660132",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Memorandum to Assistant Attorney General Holmes Baldridge",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/122660132",
"collections": [
"David H. Stowe Papers",
"Subject Files"
],
"subjects": [
"Labor disputes",
"Executive power"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/201193/5664985/5664985-26-01.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/201193/5664985/5664985-26-01.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/201193/5664985/5664985-26-01.jpg",
"imageCount": 39,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/122660132",
"naId": 122660132,
"levelOfDescription": "item",
"productionDates": [
{
"logicalDate": "1952-01-01",
"year": 1952
}
],
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 39,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "photo",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/201193/5664985/5664985-26-39.jpg",
"mediaId": "3c390d8165a589a8",
"ocrText": "34\nstatements have appeared in lower court opinions in World War II.\nNo case has been discovered from either World War I or II casting any\ndoubt, even in dietum, on the existence of the executive authority.\nCONCLUSION\nIn the light of the foregoing considerations the following\nconclusions are indicated. When the time comes to support the proposed\norder in the Courts, its defense should be based on the inherent\nconstitutional powers of the President, stemning directly from Article II.\nNo reliance should be placed upon alternative statutory grounds. Although\nthe question has been debated since the beginning of the republic,\nthe inherent executive power is probably broad enough to support the\naction taken, and it may leave open the possibility of contending that\nthe Government is not liable for just compensation. Whether that\nTRUMAN\ndefense would be \"open depends, of course, upon whether the degree\nthe ARCHIVES \"NATIONAL RECORDS ADMIN.\" & GOOD\nof dominion exercised in the seizure falls short of that in the\nCOVERAGE\nPewee litigation.\n34 Ken-Had Tube às Lemp Corp. V. Badeau, 55 F. Supp. 195, 197 (W.D.\nKy.), involving seizure of a plant; Alpirn V. Huffman, 49 F. Supp. 337,\n340 (D. Neb.), involving requisition of scrap.\n36,\n-39-"
}