Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/22-859new_kjfm.pdf
Page Number: 96.0

36 

SEC v. JARKESY 

SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting 

today, but those of us who cherish the rule of law have noth-
ing to celebrate. 

* 

* 

* 
Today’s  ruling  is  part  of  a  disconcerting  trend:  When it
comes  to  the  separation  of  powers,  this  Court  tells  the
American public and its coordinate branches that it knows
best.  See, e.g., Collins v. Yellen, 594 U. S. 220, 227 (2021)
(concluding  that  the  Federal  Housing  Finance  Agency’s
“structure  violates  the  separation  of  powers”  because  the 
Agency was led by a single Director removable by the Pres-
ident only “ ‘for cause’ ”); United States v. Arthrex, Inc., 594 
U. S. 1, 6, 23 (2021) (holding that “authority wielded by [Ad-
ministrative  Patent  Judges]  during  inter  partes  review is
incompatible with their appointment by the Secretary to an 
inferior office”); Seila Law, 591 U. S., at 202–205 (holding
that “the structure of the [Consumer Financial Protection
Bureau] violates the separation of powers” because it was
led by a single Director removable by the President only “for
cause”); Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Account-
ing Oversight Bd., 561 U. S. 477, 483–484, 492 (2010) (hold-
ing  “that  the  dual  for-cause  limitations  on  the  removal  of 
[Public  Company  Accounting  Oversight]  Board  members
contravene the Constitution’s separation of powers”).  The 
Court tells Congress how best to structure agencies, vindi-
cate harms to the public at large, and even provide for the 
enforcement of rights created for the Government.  It does 
all  of  this  despite  the  fact  that,  compared  to  its  political
counterparts,  “the  Judiciary  possesses  an  inferior  under-
standing of the realities of administration” and how “politi-
cal power . . . operates.”  Free Enterprise Fund, 561 U. S., at 
523 (Breyer, J., dissenting).

There are good reasons for Congress to set up a scheme
like the SEC’s.  It may yield important benefits over jury
trials in federal court, such as greater efficiency and exper-
tise, transparency and reasoned decisionmaking, as well as