Is the Pay Czar Unconstitutional?
Stanford Law professor Michael McConnell thinks so. From today’s Wall Street Journal: “As part of the hastily enacted and seldom-read legislation establishing the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), Congress authorized the Secretary of the Treasury to “require each TARP recipient to meet appropriate standards for executive compensation.” To carry out this task, last June the Treasury promulgated an emergency “Interim Final Rule,” waiving ordinary requirements for a public comment period.
As part of this emergency rule, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner created the office of “Special Master” for compensation, delegated his TARP authority to set compensation standards to this officer, and appointed Mr. Feinberg (a lawyer and mediator) to this position, without obtaining Senate confirmation.
Therein lies the problem. The Appointments clause of the Constitution, Article II, section 2, provides that all “Officers of the United States” must be appointed by the president “by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate.” This means subject to confirmation, except that “the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment” of “inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.”
Last 5 posts by Greg Adamo
- US "Pay Czar" May Dramatically Alter Corporate Governance - October 28th, 2009
- Debtor-in-Possession Lending - The "Good" Subprime - February 1st, 2009
- New IRS Guidance Facilitates Mergers in the Financial Industry - February 1st, 2009
- Disgorgement Measure of Damages Proposed for Securities Litigation - February 1st, 2009