Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "159441514",
    "label": "Report, Analysis of Opinions of the Supreme Court of the United States in the Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co., vs. Charles Sawyer",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/159441514"
}

{
    "id": "159441514",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/159441514",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Report, Analysis of Opinions of the Supreme Court of the United States in the Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co., vs. Charles Sawyer",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/159441514",
    "collections": [
        "President's Secretary's Files (Truman Administration)",
        "General Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602190/876560/876560-07-01.jpg",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602190/876560/876560-07-01.jpg",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602190/876560/876560-07-01.jpg",
    "imageCount": 21,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/159441514",
    "naId": 159441514,
    "levelOfDescription": "item",
    "productionDates": [
        {
            "dateQualifier": "ca.",
            "logicalDate": "1952-06-01",
            "month": 6,
            "year": 1952
        }
    ],
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 2,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "photo",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602190/876560/876560-07-02.jpg",
    "mediaId": "cb3c6abecf9f5382",
    "ocrText": "OPINION OF THE COURT PER BLACK, J.\nAt the very outset of his opinion, Mr. Justice Black poses\nthe question before the Court as whether the President of the United\nStates was acting within his constitutional power when he issued an\nexecutive order directing the Secretary of Commerce to take possession\nof and operate most of the Nation's steel mills. Judge Black answers\nthe question in the negative.\nThe first part of the opinion briefly sets out the position of the\nmill owners to the effect that the President's order amounts to law- -\nmaking, a legislative function given to the Congress and not to the\nPresident by the Constitution. It also refers to what we can call\nthe Government's \"aggregate\" theory, that the President had found\nthe seizure necessary to avert a national catastrophe inevitably con-\nsequent upon the stoppage of steel production and that to meet the\nemergency the President was acting within the aggregate of his\nconstitutional powers as chief executive of the Nation and Commander- -\nin-Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States\nMr. Justice Black briefly detailed the factual history of the\ncontroversy, culminating with the seizure order and the President's\nmessages to Congress. He continued by pointing out that the steel\nowners had asked the District Court to declare the orders of the\nPresident and the Secretary of Commerce, acting under his direction,\ninvalid and to issue preliminary and permanent injunctions restraining\ntheir enforcement. He summarized the Government theory as being\nbased upon two points: (1) that the President had \"inherent power\"\nto do what he had done; and (2) that no preliminary injunction should\nhave been issued because the plaintiffs had not shown that available\nlegal remedies were inadequate or that their injuries from the seizure\nwould be irreparable.\nJudge Black then stated the result below, when Judge Pine\nissued his preliminary injunction.\n-\nTwo basic issues are discussed in the Court's opinion --\n(1) is the controversy ripet for adjudication on constitutional grounds ?\nand (2) if so, was the action of the President lawful or unlawful?"
}