Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/17-130_4f14.pdf
Page Number: 37

Cite as:  585 U. S. ____ (2018) 

3 

SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting 

ers  themselves  do  not  wield  significant  authority.    Id.,  at 
607–608.  Consequently, a person who possesses the “mere
power  to  investigate  some  particular  subject  and  report 
thereon” or to engage in negotiations “without [the] power 
to  make  binding”  commitments  on  behalf  of  the  Govern-
ment is not an officer.  Ibid. 

Confirming  that  final  decisionmaking  authority  is  a 
prerequisite to officer status would go a long way to aiding 
Congress  and  the  Executive  Branch  in  sorting  out  who  is 
an officer and who is a mere employee.  At the threshold, 
Congress  and  the  Executive  Branch  could  rule  out  as  an
officer  any  person  who  investigates,  advises,  or  recom-
mends,  but  who  has  no  power  to  issue  binding  policies, 
execute the laws, or finally resolve adjudicatory questions.
Turning  to  the  question  presented  here,  it  is  true  that
the administrative law judges (ALJs) of the Securities and
Exchange Commission wield “extensive powers.”  Ante, at 
2.  They preside over adversarial proceedings that can lead 
to  the  imposition  of  significant  penalties  on  private  par-
ties.  See ante, at 2–3  (noting that the proceedings in the 
present case resulted in the imposition of $300,000 in civil 
penalties,  as  well  as  a  lifetime  bar  from  the  investment
industry).  In the hearings over which they preside, Com-
mission  ALJs  also  exercise  discretion  with  respect  to 
important matters.  See ante, at 2 (discussing Commission 
ALJs’ powers to supervise discovery, issue subpoenas, rule
on  the  admissibility  of  evidence,  hear  and  examine  wit-
nesses, and regulate the course of the proceedings). 

Nevertheless,  I  would  hold  that  Commission  ALJs  are 
not officers because they lack final decisionmaking author-
ity.  As the Commission explained below, the Commission 
retains “ ‘plenary authority over the course of [its] admin-
istrative proceedings and the rulings of [its]  law judges.’ ”  
In  re  Raymond  J.  Lucia  Companies,  Inc.  &  Raymond  J. 
Lucia,  Sr.,  SEC  Release  No.  75837  (Sept.  3,  2015).    Com-
mission ALJs can issue only “initial” decisions.  5 U. S. C.