Trump v. Cook · ¶37

Cook, on the other hand, argues that “cause” sets a very high bar—one that the President failed to meet. In her view, Congress used “for cause” merely as a shorthand to refer to “the existing causes for presidential removal of executive officers” as defined by various other statutes. Brief in Opposition 20. And at the time of this statute’s reenactment in 1935, she explains, those causes were few—either poor performance in office (“inefficiency,” “neglect of duty,” or “malfeasance”) or “ineligibility” for office in the first place. Id., at 21–23 (internal quotation marks omitted). But, she argues, the President alleged neither. Her “private, pre-office conduct,” she concludes, can offer no cause at all. Id., at 22–23.

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.