Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-1334_8m58.pdf
Page Number: 33

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

7 

THOMAS, J., concurring in judgment 

And it provided the Governor the power to appoint “magis-
trates and other civil officers” of the Territory.  Ibid. 

In  1789,  after  the  ratification  of  the  Constitution,  the 
First  Congress  amended  the  Northwest  Ordinance  “to 
adapt [it] to the present Constitution of the United States.” 
Id.,  at  51.    One  of  these  amendments  provided  that  “the
President shall nominate, and by and with the advice and 
consent of the Senate, shall appoint all officers which by the 
said ordinance were to have been appointed by the United 
States in Congress assembled, and all officers so appointed
shall be commissioned by him.”  Id., at 53.  The officers not 
previously  designated  for  congressional  appointment,  in-
cluding “magistrates and other civil officers,” remained sub-
ject to appointment by the Governor.  Id., at 51, n. (a), and 
53.  These amendments (and lack thereof ) provide strong 
evidence that the First Congress understood the distinction 
between territorial officers and officers of the National Gov-
ernment. 

As the Court recognizes, Congress revised the Northwest
Ordinance to require “a Presidential-appointment, Senate-
confirmation  process  for  high-level  territorial  appointees 
who assumed federal, as well as local, duties.”  Ante, at 8 
(emphasis added).  For example, Congress revised the ap-
pointment process for the Governor of the Northwest Terri-
tory,  who  performed  duties  under  the  powers  of  the  Na-
tional Government in addition to his Article IV territorial 
duties.  The Governor “discharg[ed] the duties of superin-
tendent of Indian affairs,” Act of Sept. 11, 1789, ch. 13, §1, 
1 Stat. 68, which required him to execute congressional reg-
ulations, manage trade with Indians, and obey instructions 
received from the Secretary of War with respect to his du-
ties as superintendent.  See Ordinance for the Regulation
of Indian Affairs (Aug. 7, 1786); see also F. Prucha, Ameri-
can Indian Policy in the Formative Years: The Indian Trade 
and Intercourse Acts 1790–1834, p. 36 (1962).  The Gover-
nor negotiated treaties with Indians on behalf of the United