Morrison v. Olson: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
(Created page with "{{Infobox Case Brief |court=U.S. Supreme Court |citation=487 U.S. 654 (1988) |date=1988 |subject=Constitutional Law |appealed_from= |case_treatment=No |overturned= |partially_...") |
Lost Student (talk | contribs) m (Text replacement - "|case_treatment=No " to "") |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
|date=1988 | |date=1988 | ||
|subject=Constitutional Law | |subject=Constitutional Law | ||
|facts=A government act provided for the appointment of an independent counsel to investigate alleged wrong-doing by the President. | |facts=A government act provided for the appointment of an independent counsel to investigate alleged wrong-doing by the President. | ||
|issues=Whether this constitutionally provided act is in violation of the separation of powers doctrine. | |issues=Whether this constitutionally provided act is in violation of the separation of powers doctrine. | ||
| | |||
Do restrictions on the removal of "inferior officers" in Agencies dilute the Executive branch's powers under the [[Constitution_of_the_United_States#Appointments|Appointments Clause]]? | |||
|holding=The removal provisions of the Act puts the power squarely in the hands of the Executive Branch via the Attorney General. | |holding=The removal provisions of the Act puts the power squarely in the hands of the Executive Branch via the Attorney General. | ||
|rule=When the functions required of the President are not impeded so that he may still perform his constitutional duty, and he still has the power to control or supervise the independent counsel’s actions, the separation of powers doctrine is respected. | |rule=When the functions required of the President are not impeded so that he may still perform his constitutional duty, and he still has the power to control or supervise the independent counsel’s actions, the separation of powers doctrine is respected. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 03:39, July 14, 2023
| Morrison v. Olson | |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
|---|---|
| Citation | 487 U.S. 654 (1988) |
| Date decided | 1988 |
Facts
A government act provided for the appointment of an independent counsel to investigate alleged wrong-doing by the President.
Issues
Whether this constitutionally provided act is in violation of the separation of powers doctrine.
Do restrictions on the removal of "inferior officers" in Agencies dilute the Executive branch's powers under the Appointments Clause?Holding
The removal provisions of the Act puts the power squarely in the hands of the Executive Branch via the Attorney General.
Rule
When the functions required of the President are not impeded so that he may still perform his constitutional duty, and he still has the power to control or supervise the independent counsel’s actions, the separation of powers doctrine is respected.
