Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/17-130_4f14.pdf
Page Number: 4

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

1 

Opinion of the Court 

NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
preliminary  print  of  the  United  States  Reports.  Readers  are  requested  to
notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash-
ington,  D. C.  20543,  of  any  typographical  or  other  formal  errors,  in  order
that corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 17–130 
_________________ 

RAYMOND J. LUCIA, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. 
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 

APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
 

[June 21, 2018] 

JUSTICE KAGAN delivered the opinion of the Court. 
The  Appointments  Clause  of  the  Constitution  lays  out
the  permissible  methods  of  appointing  “Officers  of  the
United  States,”  a  class  of  government  officials  distinct 
from mere employees.  Art. II, §2, cl. 2.  This case requires
us  to  decide  whether  administrative  law  judges  (ALJs)  of 
the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  (SEC  or  Com-
mission) qualify as such “Officers.”  In keeping with Frey-
tag  v.  Commissioner,  501  U. S.  868  (1991),  we  hold  that 
they do. 

I 

The SEC has statutory authority to enforce the nation’s 
securities laws.  One way it can do so is by instituting an
administrative  proceeding  against  an  alleged  wrongdoer.
By  law,  the  Commission  may  itself  preside  over  such  a 
proceeding.  See  17  CFR  §201.110  (2017).  But  the  Com-
mission also may, and typically does, delegate that task to
an  ALJ.  See  ibid.;  15  U. S. C.  §78d–1(a).    The  SEC  cur-
rently  has  five  ALJs.    Other  staff  members,  rather  than 
the  Commission  proper,  selected  them  all.    See  App.  to
Pet. for Cert. 295a–297a.