Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A category within Justice Jackson's tripartite framework for evaluating presidential power over domestic affairs. It applies when the President acts contrary to the express or implied will of Congress. In this category presidential authority reaches its weakest point and the action is presumptively invalid unless supported by exclusive constitutional powers that Congress cannot regulate.
During a cyberattack the President ordered federal agents to seize and operate NimbusSoft data centers. An existing statute assigned emergency control to a civilian agency that opposed the seizures and favored contractual arrangements. NimbusSoft sued to enjoin the order. The court placed the action in the lowest-ebb category because it conflicted with Congress's chosen scheme and held the seizure likely unconstitutional.
The President ordered the military detention of a U.S. citizen captured on domestic soil as an enemy combatant. Congress had enacted statutes governing enemy combatant detentions that required specific procedural protections. The citizen petitioned for habeas relief. The court treated the detention as falling at the lowest ebb because it bypassed the statutory scheme and required the government to justify the action solely on independent executive power.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
The President entered an executive agreement with a foreign government that settled pending claims of U.S. energy companies and channeled them to an international commission. Congress had long authorized such settlements and raised no objection. The companies challenged the agreement's effect on their suits. The court upheld the agreement because congressional acquiescence kept the action outside the lowest-ebb category.
The President directed state law-enforcement officers to perform federal background checks under a new statute. Congress had not required state participation and the states objected. The states sued to enjoin enforcement. The court analyzed the directive under the lowest-ebb category because it ran counter to Congress's decision not to commandeer state officials and held the requirement unconstitutional.
The President created military commissions by executive order to try detainees using procedures that deviated from the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Congress had enacted statutes governing military commissions that required specific procedural safeguards. A detainee challenged the commissions' validity. The court placed the order at the lowest ebb because it conflicted with the statutory scheme and invalidated the commissions.
The President attempted to remove members of an independent oversight board created by statute that limited removal to specific causes. Congress had insulated the board from at-will presidential removal. The board members challenged the attempted removals. The court treated the action as falling at the lowest ebb because it contradicted the statutory removal scheme and held the removals invalid.
The action falls into the lowest-ebb category. Presidential authority then rests solely on independent constitutional powers minus any overlapping congressional authority. Courts scrutinize such claims with caution and usually find them invalid.
Supporting sources
The zone of twilight applies when Congress has neither authorized nor prohibited the action. The lowest-ebb category applies only when the President acts contrary to Congress's express or implied will. Actions in the lowest-ebb category receive far stricter judicial review.
Supporting sources
No. Even during emergencies the category depends on the relationship between the President's action and Congress's expressed or implied will. When a statute already addresses the subject and the President chooses a different method, the action remains at the lowest ebb.
Supporting sources
No. Commander-in-chief authority does not extend to overriding a statutory scheme for domestic production or seizure of private facilities. Such an override places the action at the lowest ebb and renders it presumptively invalid.
Supporting sources
…authorization, he acts in a zone of twilight. When he acts in contravention of the will of Congress, his power is at its lowest ebb. In this case the President acted without authority from Congress. He acted in the face of statutes that withheld such power from him. His action cannot be sustained. The judgment of the…