Who Are 'Officers of the United States'?
112 Pages Posted: 16 Feb 2017 Last revised: 19 Nov 2017
Date Written: November 17, 2017
Abstract
For decades courts have believed that only officials with “significant authority” are “Officers of the United States” subject to the Constitution’s Article II Appointments Clause requirements. But this standard has proven difficult to apply to major categories of officials, leading to a circuit split over whether certain administrative law judges need Article II appointments. This article examines whether “significant authority” is even the proper standard, at least as that standard has been applied in modern practice. To uncover whether the modern understanding of the term “officer” is consistent with the term’s original public meaning, this article uses two distinctive tools: (i) “corpus linguistics”-style analysis of Founding-era documents and (ii) examination of appointments practices in the Continental Congress and the First Federal Congress. Both strongly suggest the original public meaning of “officer” is much broader than modern doctrine assumes — encompassing any government official with responsibility for an ongoing governmental duty.
This historic meaning of “officer” likely would extend to thousands of officials not currently appointed as Article II “officers,” such as tax collectors, disaster relief officials, federal inspectors, customs officials, and administrative judges. This conclusion might at first seem destructive to the civil service structure as it would involve re-designating these officials as Article II “officers” — not employees outside the scope of Article II requirements. But this Article suggests that core components of the current federal hiring system might fairly readily be brought into compliance with Article II by amending who exercises final approval to rank candidates and hire them. These feasible but significant changes would restore a critical mechanism for democratic accountability and transparency inherent in the Appointments Clause requirements.
Keywords: Administrative law, constitutional law, interpretation, officers, appointments, Article II, corpus linguistics, original public meaning
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Paper statistics
Recommended Papers
-
Information for Submitting Articles to Law Reviews & Journals
By Allen Rostron and Nancy Levit
-
'No' Review of Philip Hamburger, 'Is Administrative Law Unlawful?'
-
By Gregory Sisk, Valerie Aggerbeck, ...
-
The Fixation Thesis: The Role of Historical Fact in Original Meaning
-
The Origins of Judicial Deference to Executive Interpretation
-
Ex Parte Merryman: Myth, History, and Scholarship
By Seth Tillman
-
Originalism's Subject Matter: Why the Declaration of Independence is not Part of the Constitution
By Lee Strang
-
By Richard Re
