Edmond v. United States
| Edmond v. United States | |
|---|---|
| Argued February 24, 1997 Decided May 19, 1997 | |
| Full case name | Jon E. Edmond v. United States |
| Docket no. | 96-262 |
| Citations | 520 U.S. 651 (more) 117 S. Ct. 1573; 137 L. Ed. 2d 917 |
| Holding | |
| Inferior officers are those who are supervised and subject to termination by principal officers, that is, those officers appointed by the President with the consent of the Senate. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Scalia, joined by Rehnquist, Stevens, O'Connor, Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer; Souter (Parts I and II) |
| Concurrence | Souter (in part) |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const., Art. II, §2, cl. 2 | |
Edmond v. United States, 520 U.S. 651 (1997), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which it held that members of the Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals were "inferior officers" under the Appointments Clause. The court also sought out to define "inferior officers", and generally held that inferior officers were those whose decisions could be reviewed by, and could be removed without cause by, a principal officer who is appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.