Trump v. Slaughter · ¶216

For decades after that, the Court continued to cabin My ers to its “essence,” explaining that it stands only for the proposition that “Congress [may not] ‘dra[w] to itself ’” the power to remove, Morrison, 487 U. S., at 686, and says nothing about provisions merely “limit[ing] the President’s powers of removal,” Bowsher, 478 U. S., at 724. As Justice Frankfurter put it in Wiener, Myers’s “assumption” of “the President’s inherent constitutional power to remove officials, no matter what the relation of the executive to the discharge of their duties and no matter what restrictions Congress may have imposed regarding the nature of their tenure,” was “short-lived.” 357 U. S., at 352. The majority is thus free to complain about the “shabby treatment” Myers has received, ante, at 34, but it has decades of precedent to blame for that, not this dissent. From Humphrey’s to Wie ner to Bowsher to…

slip opinion, revised 7/07/26
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.