Morrison v. Olson
Morrison v. Olson, 487 U.S. 654 (1988), was a Supreme Court of the United States decision that determined the Independent Counsel Act was constitutional. Morrison also set important precedent determining the scope of Congress's ability to encumber the President's authority to remove Officers of the United States from office. In Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (2020), the Supreme Court distinguished Morrison as a narrow exception applying only to inferior officers.
| Morrison v. Olson | |
|---|---|
| Argued April 26, 1988 Decided June 29, 1988 | |
| Full case name | Alexia Morrison, Independent Counsel v. Theodore Olson, et al. |
| Citations | 487 U.S. 654 (more) 108 S. Ct. 2597; 101 L. Ed. 2d 569; 1988 U.S. LEXIS 3034; 56 U.S.L.W. 4835 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | In re Sealed Case, 838 F.2d 476 (D.C. Cir. 1988); probable jurisdiction noted, 484 U.S. 1058 (1988). |
| Holding | |
| The Independent Counsel Act's restriction on the power of the Attorney General to remove an inferior officer only for good cause does not violate the Appointments Clause. The Independent Counsel Act is constitutional, as it does not increase the power of the judiciary or legislative branches at the expense of the executive branch. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Rehnquist, joined by Brennan, White, Marshall, Blackmun, Stevens, O'Connor |
| Dissent | Scalia |
| Kennedy took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. art. II | |
Over the years, the case has become at least as well known for its lone dissent by Justice Antonin Scalia.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.