Pressler, Member, U. S. House of Representatives v. Blumenthal, Secretary of the Treasury
Larry Pressler, Member, United States House of Representatives v. W. M. Blumenthal, Secretary of the Treasury
Opinion of the Court
Appeal from D. C. D. C. Motion of James M. Jef-fords et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted. Judgment affirmed.
Concurrence
Mr. Justice Rehnquist,
concurring.
In joining the summary affirmance of the judgment of the District Court in this case, I think it important to point out that such affirmance does not necessarily reflect this Court’s agreement with the conclusion reached by the District Court on the merits of the Ascertainment Clause ques *1029 tion. The District Court decided that appellant did have standing to litigate this issue by virtue of the fact that he was a Member of Congress, but decided the issue against him on the merits. Our “unexplicated affirmance” without opinion could rest as readily on our conclusion that appellant lacked standing to litigate the merits of the question as it could on agreement with the District Court’s resolution of the merits of the question.
Combined text as published — syllabus, headnotes and all opinions in one document
434 U.S. 1028 98 S.Ct. 758 54 L.Ed.2d 776
Larry PRESSLER, Member, United States House of Representatives v. W. M. BLUMENTHAL, Secretary of the Treasury, et al
No. 77-450
Supreme Court of the United States
January 16, 1978
The motion of James M. Jeffords et al. for leave to file a brief, as amici curiae, is granted.
The judgment is affirmed.
Mr. Justice REHNQUIST, concurring.
1
In joining the summary affirmance of the judgment of the District Court in this case, I think it important to point out that such affirmance does not necessarily reflect this Court's agreement with the conclusion reached by the District Court on the merits of the Ascertainment Clause question. The District Court decided that appellant did have standing to litigate this issue by virtue of the fact that he was a Member of Congress, but decided the issue against him on the merits. Our "unexplicated affirmance" without opinion could rest as readily on our conclusion that appellant lacked standing to litigate the merits of the question as it could on agreement with the District Court's resolution of the merits of the question.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(automatic increases under the Executive Salary Cosb-of-Living Adjustment Act of 1975 “fix congressional compensation by law”)
Cited by 9 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
- Roxanne Delgado v. State of New York
- John Boehner v. Donnald K. Anderson, Clerk of the House Martha S. Pope, Secretary of the Senate William J. Clinton, President of the United States
- Gordon J. Humphrey, Senator v. James A. Baker, Secretary of the Treasury
- Humphrey v. Baker
- Quinn v. Donnewald
- Moore v. U.S. House of Representatives
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.