Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-1334_8m58.pdf
Page Number: 11

Cite as:  590 U. S. ____ (2020) 

7 

Opinion of the Court 

omitted).  By “limiting the appointment power” in this fash-
ion, the Clause helps to “ensure that those who wielded [the 
appointments  power]  were  accountable  to  political  force 
and the will of the people.”  Freytag, supra, at 884; see also 
Edmond, 520 U. S., at 659.  “The blame of a bad nomination 
would fall upon the president singly and absolutely,” while 
“[t]he censure of rejecting a good one would lie entirely at 
the  door  of  the  senate.”    Id.,  at  660  (internal  quotation
marks omitted). 

These  other  structural  constraints,  designed  in  part  to 
ensure political accountability, apply to all exercises of fed-
eral  power,  including  those  related  to  Article  IV  entities.
Cf., e.g., Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority v. Cit-
izens  for  Abatement  of  Aircraft  Noise,  Inc.,  501  U. S.  252, 
270–271  (1991)  (MWAA)  (separation-of-powers  principles
apply when Congress acts under its Article IV power to leg-
islate “respecting . . . other Property”).  See also, e.g., Act of 
Aug. 7, 1789, ch. 8, 1 Stat. 50 (the First Congress using bi-
cameralism and presentment to make rules and regulations 
for the Northwest Territory).  The objectives advanced by
the Appointments Clause counsel strongly in favor of that
Clause applying to the  appointment of all “Officers of the 
United States.”  Why should it be different when such an
officer’s duties relate to Puerto Rico or other Article IV en-
tities? 

Indeed,  the  Appointments  Clause  has  no  Article  IV  ex-

ception.  The Clause says in part 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, 
whose  Appointments  . . .  shall  be  established  by  Law 
. . . .”  Art. II, §2, cl. 2. 

That text firmly indicates that it applies to the appointment 
of all “Officers of the United States.”  And history confirms