The question
Whether the statutory provision allowing Federal Trade Commissioners to be removed by the President only for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office is consistent with the separation of powers.
Trump v. Slaughter
What the Court decided
The Court held that the FTC's for-cause removal provision is unconstitutional. The Constitution vests the executive power in the President and requires that he take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and to remain accountable to him the officers who exercise that power must be removable by him. The statute limited removal of Commissioners to inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office, which the Court found contrary to the separation of powers.
How the justices split
6-3The Court's opinion
Roberts, joined by Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett, Thomas
The Constitution vests the executive power in a single President and directs him to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, establishing a hierarchy in which subordinate officers derive their offices from and remain subject to the President. To remain accountable to the President, those officers must be removable by him. The statute's limitation of FTC Commissioner removal to inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office is therefore contrary to the separation of powers. Thomas joined the opinion except as to Part III-B.
Concurring
Gorsuch, writing alone
Gorsuch filed a concurring opinion. The syllabus does not state its distinct reasoning beyond agreement with the Court's judgment and opinion.
Dissenting
Sotomayor, joined by Kagan, Jackson
Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion, joined by Kagan and Jackson, disagreeing with the Court's conclusion that the FTC's for-cause removal provision violates the separation of powers.
How we know · 5 sourced claims
The Court held that the FTC's for-cause removal provision is contrary to the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution.
Source: syllabus, Held
The statute permits removal of FTC Commissioners by the President only for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.
Source: syllabus, Held
Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court, joined by Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, and by Thomas as to all but Part III-B.
Source: syllabus, lineup
Gorsuch filed a concurring opinion.
Source: syllabus, lineup
Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion, in which Kagan and Jackson joined.
Source: syllabus, lineup