Trump v. Slaughter · ¶58

Humphrey's framework, in short, has not withstood the test of time. While Humphrey's was surely right to focus on “the character of the office” at issue, 295 U. S., at 631, and surely right to say that “purely executive” powers must be controlled by the President, id., at 632, we long ago abandoned the notion that there are some powers that are only partly executive. Forty years have now passed, in fact, since we recognized that the FTC exercises executive power—and did so even in 1935, when Humphrey's was decided. See Morrison, 487 U. S., at 690, n. 28; id., at 724–725 (Scalia, J., dissenting); see also Seila Law, 591 U. S., at 216, n. 2. And more than 200 years have passed since we recognized that the Constitution “vests the whole executive power in the President” alone. Osborn v. Bank of United States, 9 Wheat. 738, 819 (1824) (Marshall, C. J., for the Court).

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