Aucbvax.2838
fa.poli-sci
utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!poli-sci
Thu Aug 27 21:50:30 1981
POLI-SCI Digest V1 #116
>From JSol@RUTGERS Thu Aug 27 21:45:39 1981
POLI-SCI AM Digest Friday, 28 Aug 1981 Volume 1 : Issue 116
Today's Topics: Judiciary Vs. Executive Branch
Separation of Powers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 27 Aug 1981 17:49:09-PDT
From: poli-sci-link at Berkeley
In real life: Steven M. Bellovin, U. of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Subject: judiciary vs. executive
I'm not certain of the details in the Louisiana case, but we just went
through a similar settlement here. Technically, what happened is that
UNC and the government signed a consent decree, which states what UNC
will and will not be required to do. Such decrees are very common in
civil proceedings, and typically do not contain any admission of
wrong-doing. Once a suit has been filed, the presiding judge must
approve the settlement, so there is some judicial review. Anyone who
objects -- in this case, the NAACP Legal Defense Fund -- may appeal
the judge's order and/or file a separate suit challenging the consent
decree.
------------------------------
Date: 27 Aug 1981 1908-PDT
Sender: LEAVITT at USC-ISI
Subject: President's role in suits
From: Mike Leavitt <LEAVITT USC-ISI AT>
As far as I know, the President was acting strictly in the role
of one of the parties to the suit. If you are sueing someone,
and for whatever reason, you decide to drop the suit, you are
nearly always able to do that. If the Carter Justice Department
was the plaintiff in a desegregation suit, since Reagan now runs
the show, he can step in. NB, he can't decide the case. He can
just act like any other party, and try to "settle out of court,"
which means dropping it.
Mike
------------------------------
Date: 27 Aug 1981 19:41:52-PDT
From: CSVAX.upstill at Berkeley
Subject: Separation of powers
Re: The President's power to settle court cases. True, hearing and
administering litigation is the exclusive province of the courts. But
it takes two to tango: somebody has to act as prosecutor, in this kind
of case, the Dept. of Justice. When the DoJ goes away, the case
collapses without anybody to argue the prosecution. Making settlements
is another thing the DoJ does: agreeing to lay off when its goals are
satisfactorily met. The rub is the definition of goals and enough.
Reagan's DoJ apparently got enough for Reagan.
------------------------------
End of POLI-SCI Digest
**********************
-------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
gopher://quux.org/ conversion by John Goerzen <
[email protected]>
of
http://communication.ucsd.edu/A-News/
This Usenet Oldnews Archive
article may be copied and distributed freely, provided:
1. There is no money collected for the text(s) of the articles.
2. The following notice remains appended to each copy:
The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright (C) 1981, 1996
Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.
