LAYING IT ON THE LINE - A DIALOGUE ON LINE ITEM VETOES AND SEPARATIONOF POWERS

In this Dialogue, constitutional pundits Confident and Doubtful debate the Line Item Veto Act of 1996. They wrangle about the application of the Article I, 7 process to the Act, the relevance of the legislative bargaining process to its constitutionality, and the merits of formal ism and functionalism. As Confident becomes No-Longer-So-Confident, Do ubtful proposes a way to reconcile the seemingly irreconcilable ''form alist'' and ''functionalist'' Supreme Court decisions. Marshalling the constitutional text for support, Doubtful argues that the Court shoul d take a checks and balances approach to congressional delegations of power to the executive, while maintaining a rigorous separation of pow ers review, of Article I powers. At the time of the writing of this Di alogue, the Line Item Veto Act was, as the prologue indicates, awaitin g a pronouncement from the Supreme Court. In Clinton v. City of New Yo rk,(1) the Act was invalidated. However, the Dialogue stands not only as a strong dissent to the majority's opinion in that case, but as a p owerful argument for a new conception of formalism and functionalism.