Homan v. Branstad
Iowa Supreme Court
812 N.W.2d 623 (2012)
- Written by Deanna Curl, JD
Facts
In 2011, the Iowa legislature passed Senate File 517 (the bill), an appropriations bill. Section 15(3) of the bill allocated $8.66 million to Iowa Workforce Development (IWD) for operations. Without vetoing the appropriation, Governor Terry Branstad (defendant) vetoed § 15(3)(c), a provision that prohibited the closure of IWD field offices, and § 15(5), a provision that defined field office to require the presence of a staff person. In an accompanying veto message, the governor indicated that the veto was intended to replace staff at field offices with virtual-access computer workstations to maximize efficiency. Additionally, the governor item-vetoed § 20 of the bill, a provision restricting IWD from spending any appropriated funds on the National Career Readiness Certificate Program (the certificate program). Danny Homan (plaintiff) sued the governor, alleging that the veto violated the item-veto provision of the Iowa Constitution. The district court found that the vetoes were unconstitutional and determined that the entire bill became law without the voided vetoes.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Waterman, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
