President Truman ordered the unlawful seizure of steel mills in the spring of 1952, an action applauded by the workers and disapproved of by the mill owners. The case reached the Supreme Court of the United States and the President’s actions were deemed an overstepping of his executive powers as an independent entity.
The power of an executive order, such as the one in this case, must come from either an act of Congress or the Constitution itself. President Truman issued this executive order without the known support of Congress nor the support of the Constitution in precedent. And, although the Korean War was in progress and needed the supplies from the steel mills, that was beyond his jurisdiction as Commander In Chief due to it being a laboral concern.…show more content… However, he failed to even suggest the action to them prior to taking it and therefore could not have had the necessary support. Congress had in fact set a precedent of refusing to adopt such a method to manage labor disputes, suggesting that he would not have been given permission to seize the mills if he had brought it up with them. He only informed them of the action after he had seized control, where they then proceeded to take no action for or against the President.
The court has viewed the President as unable to himself be a lawmaker, as his role is to ensure the proper execution of the laws. He has only the power to recommend or veto laws in relation to the decisions of his Congress. Executive orders must come from the President and, in this case, must be approved and supported by the Congress. Therefore, his decision to use an executive order to seize control of private property is unconstitutional and goes behind the back of his
