United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp.

Media Items
Advocates
Martin Conboy (Argued the cause for the United States)
Neil P. Cullom (Argued the cause for appellees Barr Shipping Corp)
Homer S. Cummings (Argued the cause for the United States)
William Wallace (Argued the cause for appellees Curtiss-Wright)
Case Basics
Docket No.: 
98
Petitioner: 
United States
Respondent: 
Curtiss-Wright Export Corp.
Decided By: 
Hughes Court (1932-1937)
Opinion: 
299 U.S. 304 (1936)
Categories: 
jurisdiction, presidency, international relations

Cite this page
The Oyez Project, United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. , 299 U.S. 304 (1936)
available at: (http://oyez.org/cases/1901-1939/1936/1936_98)
Facts of the Case: 

Curtiss-Wright was charged with conspiring to sell fifteen machine guns to Bolivia, which was engaged in an armed conflict in the Chaco. This violated a Joint Resolution of Congress and a proclamation issued by President Roosevelt.

Question: 

Did Congress in its Joint Resolution unconstitutionally delegate legislative power to the President?

Conclusion: 

The Court agreed that the President was allowed much room to operate in executing the Joint Resolution; it found no constitutional violation. Making important distinctions between internal and foreign affairs, Justice Sutherland argued because "the President alone has the power to speak or listen as a representative of the nation," Congress may provide the President with a special degree of discretion in external matters which would not be afforded domestically.