...Supreme Court said that ' [t]o contend, that the obligation imposed on the [P] resident to see that the laws faithfully executed, implies a power to forbid...novel construction of the constitution, and entirely inadmissible.' Ameron. 610 F. Supp. at 756 (quotation omitted) (quoting Kendall v. United States. 37...

...Supreme Court said that ' [t]o contend, that th^» obligation imposed on the [P] resident to see that the laws faithfully executed, implies a power to forbid...novel construction of the constitution, and entirely inadmissible.' Amer on. 610 F. Supp. at 756 (quotation omitted) (quoting Kendall v. United States....

...full and exclusive duty to execute the laws, 37 US (12 Pet.) at 545-47, 612, but the Court disagreed. "To contend that the obligation imposed on the President...novel construction of the Constitution and entirely inadmissible." 37 US (12 Pet.) at 613. See alao United States v. Smith. 27 F.Cas. 1192, 1230 (Cir....

...suggesting that it "is a novel construction of the constitution, . . . and entirely inadmissible," for one "[t]o contend that the obligation imposed on the President...faithfully executed)] implies a power to forbid their execution."75 Of course, this criticism loses considerable force in light of the President's oath to...

...leave within his power."); Kendall v. United States a rel. Stokes. 37 US (12 Pet.) 522. 613 (1838) ("To contend that the obligation imposed on the President...of the constitution, and entirely inadmissable."); Lear Siegler, Inc. v. Lehman. 842 F.2.1 1 102. 1 124 (9th Cir. 1988) ("To construe this duty to faithfully...

...by the courts. See, eg, Kendall ex rel Stokes v. United States, 37 US (12 Pat.) 522, 612-13 (1838) (To contend that the obligation imposed on the President...laws faithfully executed, implies a power to forbid execution, is a novel construction of the Constitution, and entirely inadmissible.); Youngstown Sheet...

...desire to avoid "clothing the President with a power entirely to control the legislation of Congress ... To contend that the obligation imposed on the President...novel construction of the Constitution, and entirely inadmissable."5* Since Kendall, courts that have addressed the issue have denied claims that the Clause...

...required "to take care that the Laws be faithfully executed."3 Long ago the Supreme Court concluded that, "To contend that the obligation imposed on the President...novel construction of the constitution, and entirely inadmissible."'1 Examining this case and others like it, a number of respected constitutional scholars...

...leave within his power."); Kendall v. United States a ret. Stokes, 37 US (12 Pet.) 522. 613 (1838) ("To contend that the obligation imposed on the President to see the laws faithfutly executed, implies a power to forbid their execution, is a novel construction of the constitution,...

...suspend it — under Article II. As the Supreme Court held early in our Nation's history, and I quote, "To contend, that the obligation imposed on the President...novel construction of the Constitution, and entirely inadmissible. ... It would be vesting in the President a dispensing power, which has no countenance...