Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-1334_8m58.pdf
Page Number: 6

2 

FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BD. FOR 
PUERTO RICO v. AURELIUS INVESTMENT, LLC 
Opinion of the Court 

ON WRITS OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 
APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT 

[June 1, 2020]

 JUSTICE BREYER delivered the opinion of the Court. 
The  Constitution’s  Appointments  Clause  says  that  the

President 

“shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Con-
sent  of  the  Senate,  shall  appoint  Ambassadors,  other 
public  Ministers  and  Consuls,  Judges  of  the  supreme 
Court, and all other Officers of the United States . . . .” 
Art. II, §2, cl. 2 (emphasis added). 

In 2016, Congress enacted the Puerto Rico Oversight, Man-
agement,  and  Economic  Stability  Act  (PROMESA).    130 
Stat. 549, 48 U. S. C. §2101 et seq.  That Act created a Fi-
nancial Oversight and Management Board, and it provided, 
as relevant here, that the President could appoint its seven
members  without  “the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate,” 
i.e., without Senate confirmation. 

The question before us is whether this method of appoint-
ment  violates  the  Constitution’s  Senate  confirmation  re-
quirement.  In our view, the Appointments Clause governs 
the appointments of all officers of the United States, includ-
ing those located in Puerto Rico.  Yet two provisions of the 
Constitution  empower  Congress  to  create  local  offices  for
the District of Columbia and for Puerto Rico and the Terri-
tories.  See  Art.  I,  §8,  cl.  17;  Art. IV,  §3,  cl. 2.    And  the 
Clause’s term “Officers of the United States” has never been 
understood to cover those whose powers and duties are pri-
marily local in nature and derive from these two constitu-
tional  provisions.  The  Board’s  statutory  responsibilities 
consist  of  primarily  local  duties,  namely,  representing
Puerto Rico in bankruptcy proceedings and supervising as-
pects  of  Puerto  Rico’s  fiscal  and  budgetary  policies.  We 
therefore find that the Board members are not “Officers of