Text File

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 <jgoerzen@complete.org> 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.