WALTERS, ADMINISTRATOR OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, ET AL.
v.
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF RADIATION SURVIVORS ET AL.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A federal district court in California invalidated a 122-year-old federal statute capping attorney fees for veterans' benefit claims at $10, finding it violated the Constitution, but Justice Rehnquist stayed the injunction pending Supreme Court review, citing the strong presumption of constitutionality that applies to acts of Congress and noting that prior courts had upheld the statute's validity.
[1] A Circuit Justice may grant a stay of a district court's injunction pending appeal, even if the merits are not fully decided, when an Act of Congress has been in effect f…
[2] The presumption of constitutionality attaching to an Act of Congress is an equity to be considered in favor of an applicant seeking a stay.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Justice Rehnquist, Circuit Justice.
Applicants request that I stay an injunction issued by the United States District Court for the Northern District of California prohibiting on constitutional grounds the enforcement of 38 U. S. C. §§3404 and 3405. These sections prohibit the payment of a fee of more than $10 by a veteran to an agent or attorney in connection with a claim for monetary benefits under laws administered by the Veterans Administration.
The statute which the single District Judge found unconstitutional has been on the books in some form for 122 years. Within the past decade, this Court has summarily affirmed a decision of a three-judge District Court upholding the constitutionality of 38 U.
S. C. § 3404(c).
Gendron v. Levi, 423 U. S. 802 (1975), aff’g Gendron v. Saxby, 389 F. Supp. 1303 (CD Cal.).
The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has also recently upheld the validity of § 3404(c).
Demarest v. United States, 718 F. 2d 964 (1983), cert. denied, 466 U. S. 950 (1984). The application for a stay is granted. Respondents urge that the balance of hardships militates against the granting of a stay. It would take more than the respondents have presented in their response, however, to persuade me that the action of a single District Judge declaring unconstitutional an Act of Congress that has been on the books for more than 120 years should not be stayed pending consideration of the jurisdictional statement of applicants by this Court. The presumption of constitutionality which attaches to every Act of Congress is not merely a factor to be considered in evaluating success on the merits, but an equity to be considered in favor of applicants in balancing hardships. Marshall v. Barlow’s, Inc., 429 U. S. 1347 (1977) (Rehnquist, J., in chambers).
The application for a stay is accordingly granted pending the timely filing of a jurisdictional statement and the disposition of the same by this Court.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Bogle, 693 F. Supp. 1102 (S.D. Fla. 1988)…s Supreme Court in United States v. Mistretta, Nos. 87-1904, 87-7028, at 5 citing Bowen v. Kendrick, — U.S. —, 108 S.Ct. 1, 97 L.Ed.2d 787 (1987) (Rehnquist, Circuit Justice); Walters v. National Association of Radiation Survivors, 468 U.S. 1323, 1324, 105 S.Ct. 11, 12, 82 L.Ed.2d 908 (1984) (Rehnquist, Circuit Justice) ] [hereinafter “United States’ Brief”]. However, the mere recitation of this standard does not persuade us, especially in view of the position advanced by the United States.…
-
Brock v. Elsberry, Inc., 663 F. Supp. 359 (M.D. Fla. 1987)…re a question is raised as to the constitutionality of a statute, the Court begins with the fundamental doctrine that there is a strong presumption in favor of the constitutionality of the statute. See, Walters v. National Assoc. of Radiation, 468 U.S. 1323, 105 S.Ct. 11, 82 L.Ed.2d 908 (1984). The consequence of this presumption in favor of the validity of the Act is that Defendants’ burden of proof is a substantial one. Defendants must make a clear showing that the authority granted transgresses cons…
-
Bowen v. Kendrick, 483 U.S. 1304 (U.S. 1987)…ich attaches to every Act of Congress is not merely a factor to be considered in evaluating success on the merits, but an equity to be considered in favor of applicants in balancing hardships.” Walters v. National Association of Radiation Survivors, 468 U. S. 1323, 1324 (1984) (Rehnquist, J., in chambers). “Given the presumption of constitutionality granted to all Acts of Congress,” it is both likely that the Court will note probable jurisdiction here and appropriate that the statute remain in effect pending…
Authorities Cited
- Shuttleworth et ux. v. Catholic Fam. Servs., 466 U.S. 950 (U.S. 1984)
- Demarest v. United States, 466 U.S. 950 (U.S. 1984)
- Telex Corp. v. Int'l Bus. Machs. Corp., 423 U.S. 802 (U.S. 1975)
- Jamaica Sav. Bank v. Lefkowitz, 423 U.S. 802 (U.S. 1975)
- Demarest v. United States, 718 F.2d 964 (9th Cir. 1983)
- Marshall v. Barlow's, Inc., 429 U.S. 1347 (U.S. 1977)