Also known as: good behavior · good behavior clause
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A constitutional requirement that federal judges hold their offices during good behaviour. This standard supplies life tenure subject to removal only through impeachment for misconduct.
Congress created an internal review panel inside an agency to hear challenges to financial regulations. Panel members serve five-year renewable terms with salaries subject to annual appropriations cuts. A hedge fund sued in district court arguing that the panel could not exercise judicial power. The court held the structure unconstitutional because the members lacked the good behaviour tenure and salary protections required for those wielding Article III authority.
Congress established a pilot tribunal inside an executive agency to resolve small federal claims. Contract lawyers employed by the agency served one-year renewable terms with salaries set by the agency and issued binding unreviewable judgments. A losing claimant challenged the tribunal in district court. The court struck it down because the decisionmakers lacked good behaviour tenure and undiminished compensation.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
An agency created a tribunal staffed by officials removable at the President's pleasure to decide disputes over federal benefits. A claimant argued that only judges holding office during good behaviour could issue final binding decisions. The reviewing court agreed that the structure violated Article III because the adjudicators lacked the required tenure protection.
A federal agency established a rate-setting tribunal whose members served limited terms without salary protection. The tribunal issued orders that state courts then enforced as judgments. An energy producer challenged the tribunal in federal court. The court held the tribunal unconstitutional because its members did not hold office during good behaviour.
A bankruptcy court asserted authority to enter final judgment on state-law contract claims between private parties. One party objected that the claims could be decided only by judges holding office during good behaviour. The district court agreed that the bankruptcy judge lacked the constitutional tenure required to exercise that judicial power.
Congress created regional tribunals whose members served eight-year terms and faced budget-driven salary reductions. The tribunals imposed civil penalties after adversarial hearings. A regulated company challenged the penalties in district court. The court rejected the challenge because the tribunal members were not Article III judges required to hold office during good behaviour.
Federal judges must hold office during good behaviour under Article III. This grants life tenure removable only by impeachment for misconduct.
Supporting sources
Congress may create non-Article III tribunals for certain matters. Those tribunals cannot exercise the core judicial power of the United States without judges who hold office during good behaviour.
Supporting sources
Article III requires that judges holding office during good behaviour receive compensation that cannot be diminished during their continuance in office.
Supporting sources
A tribunal whose members lack good behaviour tenure cannot constitutionally exercise the judicial power of the United States. Courts invalidate such structures when they issue final unreviewable decisions on matters within federal judicial power.
Supporting sources
…this statement, although it may be doubted that Members of this Court, holding their tenure as they do during constitutional "good behavior," are at all likely to be intimidated by such public protests. But the joint opinion goes on to state that when the Court "resolve[s] the sort of intensely divisive controversy reflected…