This authority isn't from a single clause. It combines Section 8's power to spend with Section 9's *prohibition* on drawing money from the Treasury without a legislated appropriation. This limitation is what grants Congress exclusive control over federal spending.
The Constitution lacks an "immigration clause." The Supreme Court established this authority as an "inherent power" derived from national sovereignty, not specific text. This plenary power, created by judicial interpretation, is assigned to Congress.
Unlike most countries that fund legislation upon passing it, the U.S. Congress passes laws first and separately debates funding later. This fundamental disconnect between approving work and approving payment is a structural flaw that repeatedly manufactures fiscal crises and government shutdowns.
Janet Napolitano argues that recent Supreme Court doctrines presume a level of legislative clarity and capability that doesn't exist in modern politics. By expecting Congress to legislate with extreme precision on all major issues, the Court ignores institutional dysfunction and creates a standard the legislative branch cannot meet.
The legal battle over President Trump's tariffs and President Biden's student loan forgiveness both hinge on the "major questions doctrine." This Supreme Court principle asserts that if the executive branch exercises a power with vast economic and political impact based on ambiguous statutory language, the Court will rule against it, demanding explicit authorization from Congress.
Representative Sharice Davids points out a common public misconception fueled by presidential rhetoric. Presidents often say "I passed this law," but their constitutional role is limited to signing or vetoing bills. The actual, complex work of drafting, negotiating, and passing legislation is the exclusive domain of Congress, a fact often obscured in political messaging.
Congress uses its spending power to enact policies in areas where it lacks direct authority, like education or local transport. By offering "conditional spending," it creates powerful incentives for states to comply with federal standards to receive necessary funds.
The legislative process is notoriously slow, but this is an intentional feature. The Constitution's structure creates a deliberative, messy process to ensure that laws with nationwide impact are not passed hastily. This "inefficiency" functions as a crucial check on power, forcing negotiation and preventing rapid, potentially harmful policy shifts.
Introducing legislation in Congress isn't always about immediate passage. Bills frequently function as messaging vehicles to build awareness and support for an idea over several congressional terms. This gradual process allows for the evolution of major policy, like the creation of new government agencies, which rarely happens in a single two-year cycle.
Senator Elizabeth Warren argues that the separation of powers is not self-enforcing; it depends on each branch jealously guarding its own authority. A constitutional crisis arises when Congress becomes compliant and allows the executive branch to usurp its powers.
The Suspension Clause, which allows for suspending the right to challenge unlawful detention, is located in Article 1. This placement explicitly assigns the power to Congress, not the President, serving as a critical check on executive overreach during emergencies.