I need this case reworded

Case:Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha, U.S. 919 (1983)

Facts:Jagdish Chadha was admitted to the United States in 1966 on a student visa that is only to last for six years. One year after the expiration of the visa the INS ordered a hearing to determine whether or not to deport him. After two hearings, the judge ordered suspension of deportation, which meant he could stay in the United States because of his good moral character. The attorney general then recommended to Congress that Chadha be allowed to remain in the United States. Congress used its veto power and introduced a resolution opposing the permanent residence in the US to aliens. The House passed the motion and no recorded vote occurred. Chadha filed a suit first with the immigration court and then with a federal court of appeals, asking they declare the legislative veto unconstitutional. The court then asked the House and the Senate to file amicus curiae.

Issue:The issue represented is did the House of Representatives violate the Constitution's separation of powers when they ordered the deportation of Chadha contrary to the Executive decision granting him privilege to remain.

Holding: The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' judgment. It held that the resolution of the House of Representatives vetoing the Attorney General's determination is constitutionally invalid, unenforceable, and Congress may not promulgate a statute granting to itself a legislative veto over actions of the executive branch inconsistent with the bicameralism principle and Presentment Clause of the United States Constitution

Rationale (reasoning):

1.Legislation must be presented to President

2.The constitution Bicameral Legislation requirement

3.The House actions altered the legal rights

4.Congress bestowed authority to the President