The Two Appointments Clauses: Statutory Qualifications for Federal Officers
Hanah M. Volokh
Emory University School of Law
University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law, Vol. 10, 2008
Congress often exercises control over appointments to federal office by writing job qualifications and putting them directly into the statute creating the office. This practice is best examined by viewing the Appointments Clause not as a single entity, but as two related clauses that set up two very different methods of appointment: presidential nomination and Senate confirmation as the default method, and vesting in one of three authorized positions as an optional alternative method for certain types of officers. When creating an office, Congress must choose one of these methods for appointing the officer, but cannot create a hybrid method combining the two procedures. In this article, I examine the text, history, and structure of the Constitution to determine what is required by each of the two appointments processes. I conclude that statutory qualifications are consistent with the Constitution's process for vested appointments, but inconsistent with the nomination and confirmation process.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 52
Keywords: appointments, federal office, officer, constitutional law, originalism, separation of powers, presidential power
Date posted: September 22, 2007
© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 0.422 seconds