Summary

Portrait of John Paul Stevens John Paul Stevens,  Office of Personnel Management v…

“ Payments of pension benefits to retired and disabled federal servants are made "in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law" even if in particular cases they are the product of a mistaken interpretation of a statute or regulation. The Constitution contemplates appropriations that cover programs-not individual appropriations for individual payments. The Court's creative reliance on constitutional text is nothing but a red herring. ”
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of John Paul Stevens John Paul Stevens,  Office of Personnel Management v…

“ Even if the majority is correct that the statute does not itself require an exception where the Executive has misled a claimant, Richmond should still prevail. Although petitioner has an Appropriations Clause argument against any claim for money not authorized by a statutory appropriation, a court is not invariably required to entertain that argument. ”
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature