United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp.

E140389

United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. is a landmark 1936 U.S. Supreme Court case that broadly affirmed the president’s independent and plenary authority in conducting foreign affairs.

All labels observed (2)

How this entity was disambiguated

Statements (48)

Predicate Object
instanceOf U.S. Supreme Court case
foreign affairs law case
landmark case
arguedDate 1936-11-19
citation 299 U.S. 304
57 S. Ct. 216
81 L. Ed. 255
constitutionalProvisionInvolved Article II of the United States Constitution
separation of powers doctrine
country United States of America
surface form: United States
court Supreme Court of the United States
decisionDate 1936-12-21
defendant Curtiss-Wright Corporation
surface form: Curtiss-Wright Export Corporation
dissentBy Justice Harlan F. Stone
surface form: Harlan F. Stone
dissentType in part
fullName United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. self-linksurface differs
surface form: United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corporation
historicalContext Chaco War
surface form: Chaco War between Bolivia and Paraguay
holding Congress may accord the President a degree of discretion and freedom from statutory restriction in external affairs that would not be admissible in domestic affairs.
The President has broad, independent, and plenary authority in the field of foreign affairs.
The President is the sole organ of the federal government in the field of international relations.
The nondelegation doctrine is applied less strictly in matters of foreign affairs.
impact Expanded understanding of presidential power in external affairs.
Frequently cited precedent in U.S. foreign relations law.
Influenced later Supreme Court cases on executive power in foreign affairs.
issue Whether Congress unconstitutionally delegated legislative power to the President in authorizing an arms embargo.
Whether the President possesses inherent powers in foreign affairs beyond those enumerated in the Constitution.
legalSubject delegation of powers
foreign affairs power
presidential power
separation of powers
majorityJusticesJoining Charles Evans Hughes
James Clark McReynolds
Justice Louis D. Brandeis
surface form: Louis Brandeis

Justice Owen J. Roberts
surface form: Owen J. Roberts

Pierce Butler
Willis Van Devanter
majorityOpinionBy George Sutherland
originatingCourt United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
surface form: District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York
plaintiff United States of America
surface form: United States
relatedTo arms embargo on Bolivia and Paraguay
nondelegation doctrine
presidential foreign affairs powers
sole organ doctrine
reporter United States Reports
shortName Curtiss-Wright Corporation
surface form: Curtiss-Wright
statuteInterpreted Joint Resolution of Congress authorizing the President to prohibit arms sales to Bolivia and Paraguay
volume 299
yearDecided 1936

How these facts were elicited

Referenced by (4)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

George Sutherland notableWork United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp.
United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. fullName United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. self-linksurface differs
this entity surface form: United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corporation
Trading with the Enemy Act notableCase United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp.
United States Supreme Court cases of the Hughes Court includesCase United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp.