Supreme Court To Move Swiftly On Line-Item Veto Hearing Set For Late April, Justices Aim To Settle Issue By June

Acting speedily to get a major constitutional issue settled by this summer, the Supreme Court agreed Friday to rule this term on the challenge to the president’s new power to veto individual items in spending and tax bills.

In a brief order, the court put the “line-item veto” issue on a fast track and set a hearing for April 27 - an indication that it expects to rule before the term’s end, expected in late June.

Since last summer, when President Clinton began using the power granted presidents by Congress to veto parts of spending and tax legislation, Clinton has used the authority against 82 items.

Clinton, as well as the challengers of the line-item veto, joined in asking the court to act swiftly, saying that in this year’s cycle of budget legislation, everyone needs to know what role - if any - line-item vetoes are to play.

This month, U.S. District Judge Thomas F. Hogan struck down the veto power, saying it upset the balance of powers in the federal government by effectively handing over some of Congress’ legislative powers to the president.

He ruled in a consolidated case brought by groups from New York and Idaho. New York City, two hospital associations and other organizations protested Clinton’s move to strip funds that would have allowed New York City and state to give certain hospitals and health-care providers tax breaks tied to the Medicaid program.

The Snake River Potato Growers Inc. in Idaho objected to the president’s veto of a capital-gains tax break for certain sales to farmer cooperatives. The Snake River cooperative was negotiating to buy a processing plant, but when the seller realized the veto would cause him to pay an increased tax, the deal collapsed.

The court had agreed to decide the veto’s constitutionality last year but then chose not to do so because it concluded that the challengers had no legal basis for suing.

The Justice Department is contending that the new challengers should not have been allowed to sue, either. But Hogan allowed their lawsuit to proceed, finding that the individuals and organizations that challenged this time had been injured because benefits given to them by Congress were taken away by Clinton through line-item vetoes.