Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/19-1434_ancf.pdf
Page Number: 51.0

4 

UNITED STATES v. ARTHREX, INC. 

THOMAS, J., dissenting 

officers: The President “by and with the Advice and Consent 
of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Min-
isters  and  Consuls,  Judges  of  the  supreme  Court,  and  all 
other Officers of the United States.”  Art. II, §2.  But Con-
gress has discretion to change the default process for “infe-
rior” officers: “Congress may by Law vest the Appointment
of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the Presi-
dent alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Depart-
ments.”  Ibid. 

A 
The  Court  has  been  careful  not  to  create  a  rigid  test  to
divide  principal  officers—those  who  must  be  Senate  con-
firmed—from  inferior  ones.    See,  e.g.,  Edmond  v.  United 
States,  520  U. S.  651,  661  (1997)  (the  Court  has  “not  set 
forth an exclusive criterion”); Morrison v. Olson, 487 U. S. 
654,  671  (1988)  (“We  need  not  attempt  here  to  decide  ex-
actly where the line falls between the two types of officers”).
Instead, the Court’s opinions have traditionally used a case-
by-case analysis.  And those analyses invariably result in
this Court deferring to Congress’ choice of which constitu-
tional appointment process works best.1  No party (nor the 

—————— 

1 This Court has found a vast range of positions to be inferior, including 
a district court clerk, Ex parte Hennen, 13 Pet. 230, 258 (1839) (“that a 
clerk is one of the inferior officers contemplated by . . . the Constitution 
cannot  be  questioned”);  election  supervisors  tasked  with  registering 
names, inspecting and scrutinizing the register of voters, and counting 
the  votes  cast,  Ex parte  Siebold,  100  U. S.  371,  380,  398  (1880)  (“Con-
gress had the power to vest the appointment of the supervisors in ques-
tion in the circuit courts”); a vice consul who temporarily carried out the 
duties  of  the  consul, United States v.  Eaton,  169  U. S.  331,  343  (1898) 
(“The claim that Congress was without power to vest in the President the
appointment of a subordinate officer called a vice-consul, to be charged 
with  the  duty  of  temporarily  performing  the  functions  of  the  consular
office, disregards both the letter and spirit of the Constitution”); a United
States Commissioner, entrusted with “issu[ing] warrants,” “caus[ing] the 
offenders to be arrested and imprisoned, or bailed, for trial,” “sit[ting] as