United States v. George S. Bush & Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• delegating the President authority to make “necessary or appropriate” modifications to the tariff schedule precluded judicial review
• “For the judiciary to probe the reasoning which underlies [an application of administrative discretion] would amount to a clear invasion of the legislative and executive domains”
• \[T]he judgment of the President ... on the facts ... is no more subject to judicial review ... than if Congress itself had exercised that judgment.\
• \For the judiciary to probe the reasoning which underlies [an application of administrative discretion] would amount to a clear invasion of the legislative and executive domains\
• where “the President acted in full conformity with the statute,” “[n]o question of law is raised when the exercise of his discretion is challenged” (emphasis added)
• “No one has a legal right to the maintenance of an existing rate or duty.” (quoting Norwegian Prods. Co. v. United States, 288 U.S. 294, 318 (1933)). 12 Holbrook responds with an argument based on the language of the APA. Holbrook argues that (1

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).