Raines v. Byrd

Six members of Congress who had voted against the Line Item Veto Act of 1996 sued to challenge its constitutionality. The Act let the President cancel individual spending items and limited tax benefits after signing a bill into law, and it included a provision authorizing members of Congress to bring an expedited challenge. The legislators argued the Act unconstitutionally expanded presidential power and diminished the effect of their votes.

The Supreme Court held, in a decision issued June 26, 1997, that the members of Congress lacked Article III standing and dismissed the suit without reaching the merits. Writing for the Court, Chief Justice Rehnquist reasoned that the legislators alleged only an abstract, institutional injury to legislative power rather than the concrete and particularized personal injury that standing requires, and he stressed the separation-of-powers caution courts owe before entering a dispute between the political branches. Justice Souter, joined by Justice Ginsburg, concurred in the judgment; Justices Stevens and Breyer dissented. Raines v. Byrd remains a leading authority on legislative standing. The Line Item Veto Act itself was struck down the following term, on presentment grounds, in Clinton v. City of New York (1998).