| Humphrey's Executor v. United States | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued May 1, 1935 Decided May 27, 1935 | |
| Full case name | Humphrey's Executor v. United States Rathbun, Executor v. United States |
| Citations | 295 U.S. 602 (more) 55 S. Ct. 869; 79 L. Ed. 1611; 1935 U.S. LEXIS 1089 |
| Holding | |
| The President may not remove an appointee to an independent regulatory agency except for reasons that Congress has provided by law. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinion | |
| Majority | Sutherland, joined by unanimous |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. art. I; U.S. Const. art. II; Federal Trade Commission Act | |
Humphrey's Executor v. United States, 295 U.S. 602 (1935), was a Supreme Court of the United States case decided regarding whether the United States President has the power to remove executive officials of a quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial administrative body for reasons other than what is allowed by Congress. The Court held that the President did not have this power. However, Humphrey's has been distinguished by Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. In Seila, Chief Justice John Roberts described Humphrey's as holding that Congress may occasionally create independent agencies with removal only for cause if such agencies share the characteristics of the FTC in 1935.