The Supreme Court on “Officer of the United States” as used in the Constitution

 

United States v. Smith, 124 U.S. 525 (1888) (Field, J.):

“An officer of the United States can only be appointed by the president, by and with the advice and consent of the senate, or by a court of law, or the head of a department. A person in the service of the government who does not derive his position from one of these sources is not an officer of the United States in the sense of the constitution.  This subject was considered and determined in U.S. v. Germaine, 99 U.S. 508 [(1878)], and in the recent case of U.S. v. Mouat, 124 U.S. --, ante, 505 [(1888)]. What we have here said is but a repetition of what was there authoritatively declared.”

Id. at 532 (emphasis added). 

I suggest that this authoritative statement goes far to establish that the President of the United States is not an “officer of the United States.” And so Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, which is part of the Constitution, and which uses “officer of the United States”-language, does not extend to the presidency. 

Seth Barrett Tillman, ‘The Supreme Court on “Officer of the United States” as used in the Constitution,’ New Reform Club (Jan. 11, 2024, 3:50 PM), <https://reformclub.blogspot.com/2024/01/the-supreme-court-on-officer-of-united.html>;