Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf
Page Number: 53

2 

TRUMP v. UNITED STATES 

THOMAS, J., concurring 

no law establishing the office that the Special Counsel oc-
cupies, then he cannot proceed with this prosecution.  A pri-
vate citizen cannot criminally prosecute anyone, let alone a
former President. 

No  former  President  has  faced  criminal  prosecution  for 
his acts while in office in the more than 200 years since the 
founding of our country.  And, that is so despite numerous
past Presidents taking actions that many would argue con-
stitute crimes.  If this unprecedented prosecution is to pro-
ceed, it must be conducted by someone duly authorized to 
do so by the American people.  The lower courts should thus 
answer  these  essential  questions  concerning  the  Special
Counsel’s appointment before proceeding. 

I 

The Constitution sets forth how an office may be created 
and  how  it  may  be  filled.    The  Appointments  Clause  pro-
vides: 

“[The President] shall nominate, and by and with the
Advice  and  Consent  of  the  Senate,  shall  appoint  Am-
bassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges
of  the  supreme  Court,  and  all  other  Officers  of  the
United States, whose Appointments are not herein oth-
erwise provided for, and which shall be established by
Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appoint-
ment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in 
the  President  alone,  in  the  Courts  of  Law,  or  in  the 
Heads of Department.”  Art. II, §2, cl. 2. 

The  constitutional  process  for  filling  an  office  is  plain
from this text.  The default manner for appointing “Officers
of  the  United  States”  is  nomination  by  the  President  and 
confirmation by the Senate.  Ibid.  “But the Clause provides
a limited exception for the appointment of inferior officers: 
Congress may ‘by Law’ authorize” one of three specified ac-