Regan v. Wald
1984 U.S. LEXIS 134, 82 L. Ed. 2d 171, 468 U.S. 222 (1984)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A statutory grandfather clause preserving the President's 'authorities' being exercised under the Trading With the Enemy Act (TWEA) allows for the flexible adjustment of existing economic embargoes, including tightening restrictions, and does not merely freeze the specific prohibitions in place on the date of the statute's enactment.
Facts:
- In 1963, acting under the Trading With the Enemy Act (TWEA), the Treasury Department promulgated regulations creating a comprehensive economic embargo that prohibited virtually all transactions involving property in which Cuba or its nationals had an interest.
- In March 1977, the Treasury Department issued a general license (Regulation 560) that authorized, with some limitations, most travel-related economic transactions with Cuba, such as paying for meals and lodging.
- In December 1977, Congress amended TWEA to limit its use to times of war and enacted the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to govern peacetime national emergencies.
- The 1977 legislation contained a grandfather clause that permitted the President to continue exercising the TWEA 'authorities' that were 'being exercised with respect to a country on July 1, 1977.'
- In 1982, the Treasury Department amended the general license to curtail travel-related transactions with Cuba, effectively prohibiting general tourist and business travel to reduce Cuba's access to hard currency.
- Respondents, a group of American citizens, wished to travel to Cuba for purposes no longer permitted by the 1982 regulatory amendment.
Procedural Posture:
- Respondents (American citizens) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts challenging a Treasury Department regulation.
- Respondents sought a preliminary injunction to prevent enforcement of the regulation.
- The District Court denied the request for a preliminary injunction.
- Respondents appealed the denial to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.
- The Court of Appeals, concluding the regulation lacked statutory authority, vacated the District Court's order and remanded with instructions to issue the injunction.
- The Government (petitioner) was granted a stay of the Court of Appeals' mandate by the U.S. Supreme Court.
- The U.S. Supreme Court granted the Government's petition for a writ of certiorari.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the grandfather clause of Public Law 95-223, which preserved the President's TWEA 'authorities' being exercised with respect to Cuba on July 1, 1977, provide the statutory authority for the President to subsequently tighten restrictions on travel-related economic transactions with Cuba without declaring a new national emergency under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA)?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Rehnquist
Yes. The grandfather clause of Public Law 95-223 authorized the President to tighten restrictions on travel-related transactions with Cuba. The clause preserved the President's 'authorities' under TWEA that were being exercised, not the specific 'prohibitions' or 'restrictions' in place on July 1, 1977. The President's comprehensive authority to regulate all property transactions with Cuba was being exercised on that date through the underlying embargo regulations, and the general license permitting travel was merely a specific exercise of that broader authority which could be modified at any time. The term 'authorities' indicates Congress's intent to grant the President flexibility to adjust existing embargoes. Furthermore, restricting travel for foreign policy reasons, as established in Zemel v. Rusk, does not violate the Fifth Amendment right to travel, as such matters are entrusted to the political branches.
Dissenting - Justice Blackmun
No. The grandfather clause does not authorize the President to expand restrictions without following the procedures of the IEEPA. The entire purpose of the 1977 legislation was to curtail the President's broad, open-ended emergency powers that had been used in non-emergency situations. The legislative history, including the specific deletion of language that would have allowed the President to use any TWEA authority in a grandfathered situation, demonstrates that Congress intended only to preserve the specific 'uses' of authority already in effect. The majority's interpretation undermines the statute's core purpose by allowing the President to impose new, stricter controls without declaring a new national emergency as IEEPA requires.
Dissenting - Justice Powell
No. The legislative history canvassed by Justice Blackmun's dissent unmistakably demonstrates that Congress intended to bar the President from expanding the exercise of emergency authority under § 5(b) of TWEA. The word 'authorities' in the grandfather clause is not as clear as the majority suggests and its meaning should not override the clear import of the legislative history showing an intent to limit, not expand, presidential power in this area.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies the executive branch's power and flexibility in conducting foreign policy through economic sanctions. By interpreting 'authorities' broadly rather than narrowly as 'restrictions,' the Court allows the President to adapt existing sanctions regimes to changing geopolitical circumstances without seeking new congressional approval or declaring a new emergency under the more stringent IEEPA framework. This ruling reinforces the principle of judicial deference to the executive in matters of foreign policy and national security. It establishes a significant precedent that grandfather clauses relating to executive power may be read to preserve the President's full toolkit of regulatory power, not just the specific regulations in force at a particular moment.
