What’s At Stake
What is the case about?
The Supreme Court delivered a major victory for the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution. The question presented to the Supreme Court focused on whether Congress can prevent the President from removing Federal Trade Commission (FTC) commissioners except “for cause,” or whether Article II of the Constitution requires that executive officers remain accountable to, and removable by, the President. In a 6–3 decision, the Supreme Court held that the FTC’s statutory protection allowing commissioners to be removed only for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office” violates the Constitution’s separation of powers. Because FTC commissioners exercise executive power, they must remain removable by the President.
Further, the Court overruled its 91-year-old decision in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States (1935), ending nearly a century of precedent permitting Congress to insulate FTC commissioners from presidential removal.
Why does it matter?
Article II vests the executive power in a single President, not in independent commissions that operate beyond presidential control. The Court explained that because the President alone is constitutionally responsible for faithfully executing the laws, he must also have authority to supervise and, when necessary, remove the officials exercising executive power on his behalf.
For nearly a century, Humphrey’s Executor allowed Congress to shield FTC commissioners from removal by characterizing the agency as “quasi-legislative” and “quasi-judicial.” The Court concluded that framework no longer reflects constitutional reality. Today’s FTC writes binding regulations, investigates alleged violations, prosecutes enforcement actions, and adjudicates disputes. These are core executive functions that require presidential oversight.
The Court emphasized that its decision is limited to officers exercising executive power. It expressly declined to decide whether similar protections remain constitutional for entities performing non-executive functions, such as certain aspects of the Federal Reserve or non-Article II adjudicatory bodies.
Our Take
The Constitution creates one Executive, not a collection of independent policymakers insulated from democratic accountability. By restoring the President’s authority to supervise and remove executive officers, the Court reaffirmed that those who enforce federal law must ultimately answer to the elected Chief Executive, who in turn answers to the American people. Congress may create agencies, but it cannot transfer executive power away from the President while expecting him to remain constitutionally responsible for enforcing the laws.
