Inherent Powers

Inherent powers Are those powers that result “from the whole mass of powers of the national government, and from the nature of political society, not as a consequence or incidence of the powers specifically enumerated”----Contrasted with Article 1, section 1 of the Constitution which states "herein granted," the statement in Article 2, section 1 ("shall be vested") has led to the development of the theory that President has inherent powers.

In re-re's, 158 U.S. 564 (1895) [1] , was a United States Supreme Court decision handed down concerning Eugene V. Debs and labor unions. Debs, president of the American Railroad Union, was involved in the Pullman Strike earlier in 1894 and challenged the federal injunction ordering the strikers back to work. The injunction had been issued because of the hindering of transportation of U.S. Mail. However, Debs refused to end the strike and was subsequently cited for contempt of court; he appealed the decision to the courts. The main question being debated was whether the President had a right to issue the injunction, which dealt with both interstate and intrastate commerce and shipping on rail cars. Interestingly, the legislative branch never delegated to the President the power to issue injunction. However, with an opinion written by Justice David Josiah Brewer, the court ruled in a unanimous decision in favor of the U.S. government. Joined by Chief Justice Melville Fuller and Associate Justices Stephen Johnson Field, John Marshall Harlan, Horace Gray, Henry Billings Brown, George Shiras, Jr., Howell Edmunds Jackson, and Edward Douglass White, the court ruled that the government had a right to regulate interstate commerce and ensure the operations of the Postal Service, along with a responsibility to "ensure the general welfare of the public.

However, limits of inherent powers were articulated in "Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952) [1] . This case was a United States Supreme Court decision that limited the power of the President of the United States to seize private property in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under Article Two of the United States Constitution or statutory authority conferred on him by Congress. Justice Black's majority decision was, however, qualified by the separate concurring opinions of five other members of the Court, making it difficult to determine the details and limits of the President's power to seize private property in emergencies. Of particular note, Justice Jackson's concurring opinion provided three categories to be considered. 1) Congress authorizes - express or implied; 2) Congress disapproves - express or implied; or 3) Congress does nothing which can invite President's actions for the judicial branch to consider.