HOLTZMAN Et Al. v. SCHLESINGER Et Al.

Background

A lower federal court found that the bombing of Cambodia was unconstitutional. The Court of Appeals had entered a stay that allowed bombing to continue while the appeal proceeded. One Justice initially denied an application related to that stay, and Justice Douglas then reviewed the matter and acted to vacate the stay. The dispute pits people challenging the bombing—identified in the opinion as taxpayers and applicants—against the Government and its conduct of military strikes in Cambodia.

Reasoning

Justice Douglas explained the core question as whether the President can initiate war-like bombing without Congress having declared war. He emphasized the Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war and said that taking life by military action raises the gravest consequences. He also addressed whether the challengers could bring the suit, concluding that taxpayers making a constitutional claim about congressional war-making power can have standing. Because the case involves imminent deaths, Justice Douglas treated the stay like a last-resort order in a capital case and found the legal questions and harms substantial enough to lift the stay.

Real world impact

By vacating the stay, the Justice’s order temporarily prevents further bombing of Cambodia while higher courts decide the merits. The ruling does not resolve the ultimate question about presidential power or the constitutionality of the bombing; it is an interim, emergency action that could be reversed or altered on full review.