98th Congress, 1st Session House Document No. 98-94

VETO OF H.J. RES. 338

MESSAGE

FROM

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

VETOING

H.J. RES. 338, A JOINT RESOLUTION TO CORRECT PUBLIC LAW

98-03 DUE TO AN ERROR IN THE ENROLLMENT OF H.R. 3069

S e p t e m b e r 12, 1983.—Message and accompanying papers ordered to be

printed

11-011 O

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON: 19S3
To the House of Representatives:

I am returning herewith without my approval H.J. Res. 338. This 

bill was originally included in the 1983 Supplemental Appropriation 

bill, which I recently signed (P.L. 98-63), but was separately passed 

because it was inadvertently omitted from the enrolled version of that 

bill. Normally such bills passed as a result of enrollment errors are 

signed as a matter of course. I am taking this unusual action because 

of the extraordinarily important constitutional principles raised by 

this particular measure.

H.J. Res. 338 appropriates $20 million for the purpose of providing 

a source of funds from which the Secretary of Education could comply 

with the June 30,1983 order issued in United States v. Board of Education of the City of Chicago, No. 80C5124 (N.D. 111.), if the order is 

upheld on appeal. The case was brought by the United States to desegregate the Chicago school system. The court ordered the United 

States to provide a minimum of $14.6 million and froze more than 

$250 million appropriated by Congress for other educational programs 

in order to meet expenses incurred by the Chicago Board of Education in carrying out its constitutional responsibilities to desegregate 

its school system. The court enjoined the Department of Education 

from providing grants to hundreds of other worthy grantees under 

several programs of national significance, including grants intended 

to facilitate local desegregation efforts and others intended to follow 

up on the report of the National Commission on Excellence in 

Education.

I well understand the reasons motivating the Congress to pass this 

legislation. Under the order of the court in Chicago, other education 

programs throughout the country were denied the funding they rightfully expected to receive. The Chicago court’s ostensible purpose in issuing this order was to provide a source of funds for the implementation of its decree. Congress hoped by the passage of this legislation to 

induce the court to release the funds that were impounded by the court. 

But I believe that the better course is to seek swift reversal of the district court’s order.

This veto is not premised on a desire to protect the Federal budget. 

It is based upon my conviction that the Constitution and its process of 

separated powers and checks and balances does not permit the judiciary to determine spending priorities or to reallocate funds appropriated by Congress. Those are exclusively the functions of the Legislative and Executive branches, and the use of judicial decrees to assume such powers raises problems of profound constitutional 

significance.

If finally ordered to pay additional funds to the Board of Education of the City of Chicago, the Federal government will of course do 

so. It is inappropriate, however, for a court to withhold millions of 

dollars worth of unrelated and necessary education programs to enforce its orders.

Under these circumstances, I must reluctantly veto this bill.

R onald R eag an.

T h e W h it e H o use, August 13,1983.

(l)