295 U.S. 602 (1935)
William E. Humphrey was nominated by President Hoover on December 10, 1931, to succeed himself as a member of the Federal Trade Commission and was confirmed by the United States Senate.1 He was duly commissioned for a term of seven years expiring September 25, 1938, and after taking the required oath of office entered upon his duties.2
On July 25, 1933, President Roosevelt addressed a letter to the commissioner asking for his resignation on the ground that the aims and purposes of the Administration with respect to the work of the Commission could be carried out most effectively with personnel of his own selection, but disclaiming any reflection upon the commissioner personally or upon his services.3 After some further correspondence upon the subject, the President on August 31, 1933, wrote the commissioner expressing the hope that the resignation would be forthcoming and stating that their minds did not go along together on either the policies or the administering of the Federal Trade Commission.4
The commissioner declined to resign.5 On October 7, 1933, the President wrote him that effective as of that date he was removed from the office of Commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission.6 Humphrey never acquiesced in this action.7 He continued thereafter to insist that he was still a member of the commission entitled to perform its duties and receive the compensation provided by law at the rate of $10,000 per annum.8 Humphrey died on February 14, 1934.9
Plaintiff brought suit in the Court of Claims against the United States to recover a sum of money alleged to be due the deceased for salary as a Federal Trade Commissioner from October 8, 1933, when the President undertook to remove him from office, to the time of his death.10 Upon the facts set forth in the certificate the Court of Claims certified two questions to the Supreme Court in respect of the power of the President to make the removal.11
Do the provisions of section 1 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, stating that any commissioner may be removed by the President for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office, restrict or limit the power of the President to remove a commissioner except upon one or more of the causes named?12
The Federal Trade Commission Act fixes the terms of the Commissioners and provides that any Commissioner may be removed by the President for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office, intending to restrict the power of removal to one or more of those causes, as confirmed by the character of the Commission as an independent body.13
Yes. The statute fixes a term of seven years for Humphrey and allows removal only for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office. President Roosevelt removed Humphrey on October 7, 1933, without asserting any of those causes and solely because their minds did not go along together on policies.14 The legislative history shows Congress intended the commission to be independent of executive control except in selection.15
Humphrey never acquiesced in the removal and continued to claim his position until his death on February 14, 1934.16
The provisions restrict the President's power to remove a commissioner except for the causes named in the statute.17
Whether the restriction or limitation on the President's power to remove a commissioner under the Federal Trade Commission Act is valid under the Constitution of the United States?18
When Congress provides for the appointment of officers whose functions, like those of the Federal Trade Commissioners, are of legislative and judicial quality rather than executive, and limits the grounds upon which they may be removed from office, the President has no constitutional power to remove them for reasons other than those so specified.19
Yes. The Federal Trade Commission is charged with duties predominantly quasi-judicial and quasi-legislative, such as issuing cease and desist orders and investigating for Congress.20 Humphrey was removed without the statutory causes during his fixed term, but the separation of powers allows Congress to protect the independence of such officers from executive control.21 The necessity of maintaining each of the three departments free from control of the others supports this limitation on removal.22
The restriction or limitation on the President's removal power is valid under the Constitution.23