Shurtleff v. United States

Background

A federal customs appraiser challenged his removal from office under a law that created the job and said an appraiser could be removed for "inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance." The appraiser received no notice or hearing before removal and sued to recover salary accrued before the President appointed and the Senate confirmed his successor. The Court of Claims ruled against him and this appeal followed.

Reasoning

The key question was whether the statute limited the President to removing an appraiser only for the three listed causes, which would require notice and a hearing, or whether the President retained the general power to remove for other reasons. The Court explained that the power to remove commonly accompanies the power to appoint unless Congress uses very clear language to take that power away. The Court said the statute did not plainly strip the President of the broader removal power. It also noted that if removal is for one of the named statutory causes, notice and a hearing are required; because no notice or hearing occurred, the Court treated the removal as for other reasons and found the President’s action valid.

Real world impact

The decision confirms that many lower-level federal officials appointed by the President can be removed for reasons beyond those listed in a statute unless Congress explicitly says otherwise. Officers will have statutory protections only when a law clearly creates them, and absent clear language removals may proceed without prior notice or hearing except when the statute’s listed causes are relied upon. The Court affirmed the judgment of the Court of Claims.