Trump v. Slaughter · ¶179

Removal also “was not discussed in the Constitutional Convention,” Myers v. United States, 272 U. S. 52, 109–110 (1926), making an expansion of preratifcation executive power unlikely. Alexander Hamilton, then writing to support the States' ratification of the Constitution, explained that because the power to remove traditionally followed the power to appoint, “[t]he consent of [the Senate] would be necessary to displace as well as to appoint.” The Federalist No. 77, p. 458 (C. Rossiter & C. Kesler eds. 1999). This was a selling point for the Constitution, as it meant that “[a] change of the [President] would not occasion so violent or so general a revolution in the officers of the government as might be expected if he were the sole disposer of offices.” Ibid. Madison also explained that “[t]he tenure of the ministerial offices generally will be a subject of legal regulation,…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.