Trump v. Slaughter · ¶161
As Congress constructed a variety of agencies to serve the public’s needs over the decades that followed, see infra, at 10–11, this Court repeatedly applied and expanded the rule announced in Humphrey’s. In Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U. S. 579 (1952), Humphrey’s was the only example Justice Jackson provided of a case in which the President’s “power [wa]s at its lowest ebb” and the President was thus prevented from “tak[ing] measures incompatible with the expressed or implied will of Congress.” 343 U. S., at 637–638, and n. 4 (concurring opinion). Later, in Wiener v. United States, 357 U. S. 349 (1958), Justice Frankfurter’s opinion for a unanimous Court relied on Humphrey’s (describing it as a “cause célèbre”) to approve removal protections for the War Claims Commission, which settled claims by American prisoners of war and civil internees who suffered harm during World…Read in context ›
slip opinion, revised 7/07/26
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.