Trump v. Slaughter · ¶60

In later cases, although Humphrey’s announced dividing line remained intact, more and more functions, we concluded, in fact fell on the executive side of that line—and thus within the President’s exclusive control. Where Humphrey’s suggested that the power to enforce the law against particular parties could be merely “quasi-judicial,” or “in aid” of federal courts, see id., at 628, we held the opposite. “A lawsuit is the ultimate remedy for a breach of the law,” we explained in 1976, “and it is to the President, and not to the Congress, that the Constitution entrusts the responsibility to ‘take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.’” Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U. S. 1, 138 (per curiam) (quoting Art. II, §3). And where Humphrey’s suggested that the power to “fill[] in” “the details” of a “general standard” could be merely “quasi-legislative,” or “in aid” of Congress, 295 U. S., at 628,…

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