Robert Lafayette Lovell v. the State of Texas

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that presidential withdrawal of public lands was lawful because Congress had \uniformly and repeatedly acquiesced\ to the President's creation of roughly 250 reservations
• noting that “there is no distinction in principle between” an implied “power to make permanent reservations” and such a power “to make temporary withdraw- als. . . . The character of the power exerted is the same in both cases”
• noting that “[government is a practical affair intended for practical men,” and the rule, that long acquiescence in a governmental practice raises a presumption of authority, applies to the practice of withdrawals by the executive of lands opened by Congress for occupation
• “[D]etermining the meaning of a statute or the existence of a power, weight shall be given to the usage itself-even when the validity of the practice is the subject of investigation.”
• upholding the Department of the Interior’s withdrawal of one million acres for uranium mining
• validating executive withdrawals and discussing purpose and effect of Pickett Act

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).