A mechanism, deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, allowed the legislative branch, or a committee thereof, to nullify actions taken by the executive branch. It bypassed the traditional lawmaking process outlined in the Constitution, enabling Congress to unilaterally overturn executive decisions without presidential approval or judicial review. An example includes situations where Congress delegated authority to an agency to implement regulations, but retained the power to disapprove of those specific regulations through a resolution not subject to presidential veto.
This mechanism was considered important by Congress as it provided a check on executive power and allowed for greater legislative oversight of administrative actions. It offered a way to ensure that executive agencies were acting in accordance with congressional intent, even after broad delegations of authority. However, the Supreme Court case Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha (1983) declared this practice unconstitutional, arguing it violated the separation of powers principle. The Court reasoned that any action with the force of law must adhere to bicameralism (passage by both houses of Congress) and presentment (submission to the President for signature or veto).
