The Contested Removal Power, 1789-2010

Notes

Notes Introduction 1. 177 L. Ed. 2d 706 (2010). Subsequent citations will appear in the endnotes by author and page number. 2. Roberts, 724. 3. Ibid. 4. Ibid., 726. 5. Breyer, 737–738. 6. Ibid., 741. 7. Ibid., 743. 8. Roberts, 725, n. 4. 9. Ibid., 726. 10. Breyer, 737, emphasis added. 11. 295 U.S. 602 (1935). 12. 487 U.S. 654 (1988). 13. Oral argument, 21. The transcript can be found at http://www.supremecourt .gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/08–861.pdf. Accessed August 1, 2012. 14. Ibid., 44. 15. Youngstown Sheet and Tube v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952). 16. Stephen Skowronek, The Politics Presidents Make: Leadership from John Adams to George Bush (Cambridge: Belknap Press at Harvard University Press, 1993). The “order shattering” metaphor is Skowronek’s. 17. Here we rely primarily on the following: For the nonunitarian position, see A. Michael Froomkin, “In Defense of Agency Autonomy,” Yale Law Journal 96, 4 (1987): 787–814; Froomkin, “The Imperial Presidency’s New Vestments,” Northwestern University Law Review 88 (1994): 1346–1376; and Lawrence Lessig and Cass Sunstein , “The President and the Administration,” Columbia Law Review 94, 1 (1994): 2–123; For the unitarian position, see Steven Calebresi and Kevin Rhodes, “The Structural Constitution: Unitary Executive, Plural Judiciary,” Harvard Law Review 106, 6 (April 1992): 1153–1216; Steven Calabresi and Saikrishna Prakash, “The President’s Power to Execute the Laws,” Yale Law Journal 104, 3 (1994): 541–665; and Saikrishna Prakash, “Hail to the Chief Administrator: The Framers and the President’s Administrative Powers,” Yale Law Journal 102, 4 (1993): 991–1017. 18. Calebresi and Rhodes, 1166. See also Gary Lawson, “The Rise and Rise of the Administrative State,” Harvard Law Review 107, 6 (April 1994): 1244. 217 218 Notes to Pages 9–18 19. “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America” (Art. II, sec. 1). 20. “He shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” (Art. II, sec. 3); “He may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective offices” (Art. II, sec. 2). 21. Lessig and Sunstein, 40. 22. Edward S. Corwin, The President’s Removal Power Under the Constitution (New York: National Municipal League, 1927). Steven G. Calabresi and Christopher S. Yoo, The Unitary Executive: Presidential Power from Washington to Bush (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008). 23. Two book chapters by political scientists are important introductions to the removal power. See Louis Fisher, Constitutional Conflicts Between Congress and the President, 4th ed., rev. (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1997), 49–86. See also Richard Ellis, The Development of the American Presidency (New York: Routledge, 2012), 295–345. Chapter 1. The Decision of 1789 1. Charles Thach Jr., The Creation of the Presidency, –: A Study in Constitutional History (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2007), 124. 2. Ibid., 125. 3. Charlene Bangs Bickford, Kenneth R. Bowling, Helen E. Veit, and William DiGiacomantonio , eds., Documentary History of the First Federal Congress, Volume 16: Correspondence (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004), 890 (hereafter DHFFC—Correspondence). 4. Gerhard Casper, “The American Constitutional Tradition of Shared and Separated Powers: An Essay in Separation of Powers: Some Early Versions and Practices,” William and Mary Law Review 30 (Winter 1989): 233–234. 5. “Federalist No. 77,” in The Federalist, ed. Jacob Cooke (Hanover, NH: Wesleyan University Press, 1961), 515. 6. Louis Fisher, Constitutional Conflicts Between Congress and the President, 5th ed. (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2007), 48. See also David Currie, The Constitution in Congress (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997), 36–41; and Saikrishna Prakash, “New Light on the Decision of 1789,” Cornell Law Review 91 (July 2006): 1021–1077. 7. 272 U.S. 52. 8. Fisher Ames to George R. Minot, 8 July 1789, in DHFFC—Correspondence, 978. 9. William Smith (S.C.) to Edward Rutledge, 21 June 1789, in DHFFC—Correspondence , 832. 10. Charlene Bangs Bickford, Kenneth R. Bowling, and Helen E. Veit, eds., Documentary History of the First Federal Congress, Volume 10: Debates in the House of Representatives, First Session: April–May  (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992), 722–723 (hereafter DHFFC—Debates I). Notes to Pages 18–24 219 11. DHFFC—Debates I, 726. 12. “He . . . shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments...