Porcasi v. Oji

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that beneficiaries have standing to sue, citing “self-evident proposition that more than one party may have standing to challenge a particular action or inaction”
• ruling that the word “individual” can sometimes be “construed as synonymous with the word ‘person’ ”
• holding that “the power to enact statutes may only be exercised in accord with a single, finely wrought and exhaustively considered, procedure” outlined in Article I (internal quotation omitted)
• holding that “the power to enact statutes may only be exercised in accord with a single, finely wrought and exhaustively considered, procedure” outlined in Article I (internal quotation omitted)
• finding that “individual” as used in the Line Item Veto Act included both natural persons and corporations
• finding that \individual\ as used in the Line Item Veto Act included both natural persons and corporations

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).