thanks


From: Sarah Novosel on 05/23/2001 02:54 PM
To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, James D 
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON 

Subject: Presidential Power Question

I spoke with Donna Bobbish this morning about Steve's question -- does the 
President have broader authority to take action during times of crisis.  
Donna sent me this quick write up about what she has looked into so far.  
Because these questions go beyond a FERC practitioner's expertise, we asked 
Donna to work with a Constitutional Law expert at V&E to determine whether, 
and under what circumstances, the President's authority may be extended 
beyond the authorities discussed in the memo.  

We will let you know what we learn from that further research.

Sarah


----- Forwarded by Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron on 05/23/2001 03:48 PM -----

	"Bobbish, Donna J." <dbobbish@velaw.com>
	05/23/2001 12:16 PM
		 
		 To: "'snovose@enron.com'" <snovose@enron.com>
		 cc: 
		 Subject: Presidential Power Question


Sarah:  In response to Steve's inquiry, I did look into this question
briefly when you first gave me the assignment.  I read an interesting law
review article  on "The Imposition of Martial Law in the United States," for
a discussion of presidential powers.  There is no general emergency
authority granted the President in the U.S.  Constitution.  Also, the
article discussed the famous "Truman steel mills case," Youngstown Sheet &
Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952), in which the Supreme Court declared
unconstitutional President Truman's seizure of the steel mills during the
Korean War.  In that case, in light of a threatened national-wide strike in
the national steel industry, President Truman, concerned about the national
defense, issued an Executive Order directing the Secretary of Commerce to
take possession of most of the steel mills and keep them running.  The
Supreme Court said that if the President had authority to take such  an
action, he had to derive it either from an act of Congress or the
Constitution itself.  Since the Supreme Court could not find any seizure
authority, it invalidated the President's action.  The Supreme Court also
rejected the argument that the President had any powers that could be
implied from the aggregate of his powers under the Constitution.

Based on the Truman steel mills case, I thought it the wiser course of
action to look for specific authorities given to the President by statute
which might prove useful.

I could look into this question further, if you would like, but we would be
entering "martial law-type" legal territory, where the President would be
acting outside of specific Constitutional or congressional authority (which
has been described a "zone of twilight"), and in light of the Truman steel
mills case, I don't know how fruitful that might be.

Please let me know if you would like me to do anything more.  Thank you.
Donna
          ++++++CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE+++++
The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged.  This
email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual or organization
named above.  If you are not the intended recipient or an authorized
representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
review, dissemination or copying of this email and its attachments, if any,
or the information contained herein is prohibited.  If you have received
this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email
and delete this email from your system.  Thank You