Case brief summary
The President cannot make new law or take private property to settle a labor dispute unless Congress has given him that power, because only Congress can pass laws under the Constitution.
Facts
Steelworkers planned a nationwide strike, so the President ordered the government to seize and run most steel mills to keep producing steel for the Korean War effort, without citing any specific law giving him this authority.
Procedural history
The steel companies sued in federal district court, which blocked the seizure with a preliminary injunction, then the appeals court paused that block, and the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case quickly.
Issue
Did the President have constitutional or legal authority to order the government to take over and run the steel mills without a specific law from Congress allowing it?
Holding
The President's seizure order was not authorized by the Constitution or by any law, so it could not stand and the mills had to be returned.
Reasoning
Congress never gave the President this power, and even rejected it once before. His role as military commander does not let him take over private businesses just to settle a labor dispute.
Opinions
Majority (Black): The seizure was an attempt by the President to make law, which belongs only to Congress, and no statute or constitutional power authorized it.
Concurrences (Frankfurter, Douglas, Jackson, Burton, Clark): Each justice agreed the seizure was illegal mainly because Congress had already set up specific procedures for such emergencies and the President ignored them.
Dissent (Vinson, joined by Reed and Minton): The President acted lawfully and necessarily to keep steel flowing for national defense until Congress could act, following a long history of presidents taking emergency action.