Seila Law v. Consumer Fin. Protection Bureau

Supreme Court of the United States · 2020 · Constitutional Law
140 S. Ct. 2183 (2020)
Updated
Constitutional LawSeparation of PowersPresidential RemovalSeverabilityArticle IIexecutive powerremoval powersingle-director agency

Facts

The CFPB is headed by a single Director serving a five-year term and removable by the President only for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office. The Director exercises significant executive authority, including issuing binding rules under 19 federal statutes, conducting administrative adjudications, and bringing enforcement actions seeking substantial penalties against private parties. The agency also receives funding outside the annual appropriations process. A CFPB Director issued a civil investigative demand to Seila Law, and the Government petitioned to enforce it.

Issue

Whether the separation of powers permits Congress to create an independent agency led by a single Director who is a principal officer wielding significant executive power and who is protected from removal by the President except for cause. If not, whether that removal restriction is severable from the rest of the Dodd-Frank Act provisions establishing the CFPB.

Rule

The President's removal power is the general rule under Article II. Although prior precedents recognized limited exceptions for certain multimember expert agencies and certain inferior officers with limited duties, those precedents do not extend to a principal officer who, acting alone, wields significant executive power; such an official must remain removable by the President. When a statute contains an unconstitutional removal restriction, that restriction must be severed if the remaining provisions can function independently and the statute indicates Congress would prefer the remainder to remain operative.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

  • The court's holding and reasoning
  • Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
  • 10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case
Sign up free to see more →
Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.
Congress creates the National Data Security Bureau, headquartered in Denver, led by a single Senate-confirmed Director serving a six-year term. The Director may issue binding cybersecurity regulations for private companies, conduct administrative adjudications, and seek large civil penalties in federal court, but the President may remove the Director only for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.

If challenged on separation-of-powers grounds, how should a court most likely rule?

Explanation. Article II makes presidential removal the general rule. The majority refused to extend prior exceptions to a principal officer who acts alone and exercises significant executive power, including binding rulemaking, adjudication, and enforcement against private parties. A single-director agency with that combination of features is unconstitutional if the director is protected from removal except for cause. (Derived from Seila Law v. Consumer Fin. Protection Bureau (2020).)