Legal Opinion

Ninetieth Minnesota State Senate v. Dayton

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided November 16, 2017No. A17-1142PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

GILDEA, Chief Justice.

On May 25, 2017, the Ninetieth Minnesota State Senate and the Ninetieth Minnesota State House of Representatives (collectively, the Legislature) each adjourned sine die, ending the special session that began on May 23, 2017. On May 30, 2017, the Governor vetoed line-item appropriations to the Legislature for its biennial budget. The Legislature commenced this action, contending, in part, that the line-item veto power cannot be used over the appropriations to itself without violating the Separation-of-Powers clause, Minn. Const, art. III. The Governor contends that…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Marbury v. MadisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1803
  2. The Pocket Veto CaseSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
  3. Chiles v. CHILDREN A, B, C, D, E, AND FSupreme Court of Florida · 1991
  4. Brayton v. PawlentySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
  5. Rios v. SymingtonArizona Supreme Court · 1992

30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Cruz-Guzman v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2018
  2. State of Alaska, Office of Lieutenant Governor, Division of Elections and Director Gail Fenumiai, in an official capacity v. Recall DunleavyAlaska Supreme Court · 2021
  3. Olson v. LeschCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2019
  4. Cruz-Guzman v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2018
  5. Steve Simon, Minnesota Secretary of State, Petitioner, vs. Lisa Demuth, Respondent (A25-0066). Melissa Hortman, et al., ...Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2025

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API