Constitutional Law Keyed to Cohen
INS v. Chadha
CaseCast™ – "What you need to know"
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
- Topic: Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.
- Parties: Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.
- Procedural Posture & History: Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.
- Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.: A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.
- Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises: Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
- Brief Facts: A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.
- Rule of Law: Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.
- Facts: What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case. Review the Facts of this case here:
Plaintiff, Mr. Chadha, challenged a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act (“Act”) that allowed one house of Congress, by resolution, to invalidate and thus, veto the decision of the Executive branch to allow a particular deportable alien to remain in the United States. The Act authorized the Attorney General to suspend deportation if the alien met certain conditions, deportation would result in “extreme hardship,” and the Attorney General reported to Congress. The Attorney General suspended Plaintiff’s deportation pursuant to the Act and notified Congress. A year and a half later, the House of Representatives passed a resolution stating that Plaintiff’s deportation should not be suspended. The House resolution was not submitted to the Senate or presented to the President. The Court of Appeals held that the House action was unconstitutional as a violation of the separation of powers.
- Issue(s): Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.
- Holding: Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.
- Concurring / Dissenting Opinions: Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.
- Reasoning and Analysis: Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.