Reappointment of United States Parole Commissioners ( 1987 )


Menu:
  •      Reappointment of United States Parole Commissioners
    A statute providing for the automatic extension o f the term o f a Presidential appointee unconsti­
    tutionally interferes with the President’s authority under the Appointments Clause.
    November 2, 1987
    M   em orandum       O p in io n   for an   A s s o c ia t e D e p u t y A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l
    This responds to your request for this Office’s opinion as to whether, under
    § 235(b)(2) of Pub. L. No. 98^173, 
    98 Stat. 1837,2032
     (1984), the terms of the
    United States Parole Commissioners who are on duty as of November 1, 1987,
    will automatically be extended for a five-year period without the necessity of
    new Presidential appointments. More specifically, you inquired as to whether
    the term of office for one of the Commissioners which expires at the close of
    business November 1, 1987, will automatically extend through November 1,
    1992. For the reasons discussed below, we have concluded that § 235(b)(2) is
    unconstitutional, but that it is in the President’s discretion to allow the Com­
    missioner to continue service as a Commissioner as a holdover appointee.
    Section 235(b)(2) of Pub. L. No. 98-473, the Sentencing Reform Act of
    1984 (Act), provides that the term of office of a United States Parole Commis­
    sioner who is in office on the effective date of the Act is extended to the end of
    the five-year period after the effective date. Section 235(b)(2) thus purports to
    extend to November 1, 1992 the terms of office for those Commissioners in
    office on November 1, 1987.
    The President has the sole authority to appoint members of the Parole
    Commission. The Appointments Clause of the Constitution, art. II, § 2, cl. 2,
    provides that “Officers of the United States” must be appointed by the Presi­
    dent by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. The methods of
    appointment set forth in the Appointments Clause are exclusive; officers of the
    United States therefore cannot be appointed by Congress, or by congressional
    officers. Buckley v. Valeo, 
    424 U.S. 1
    , 124-41 (1976). Persons who “exercis[e]
    significant authority pursuant to the laws of the United States” or who perform
    “a significant governmental duty .. . pursuant to the laws of the United States”
    are officers of the United States, 
    id. at 126, 141
    , and therefore must be
    appointed pursuant to the Appointments Clause. This Office has consistently
    found that the Parole Commissioners are purely Executive officers charged by
    135
    Congress with the exercise o f administrative discretion.1 Accordingly, the
    Parole Commissioners must be appointed by the President in accordance with
    the Appointments Clause.
    We find that § 235(b)(2) is an unconstitutional interference with the
    President’s appointment power. By extending the term of office for incumbent
    Commissioners appointed by the President for a fixed term, the Congress will
    effectively reappoint those Commissioners to new terms. Because the authority
    to appoint members of Parole Commissioners lies exclusively in the President,
    § 235(b)(2) is an unconstitutional encroachment by Congress on that authority.
    The constitutional problems with § 235(b)(2), however, do not preclude
    Commissioner Batjer from continuing to serve past the expiration date of his
    current appointment. We note that 
    18 U.S.C. § 4202
     provides that upon the
    expiration of a term of office of a Commissioner, the Commissioner shall
    continue to act until a successor has been appointed and qualified, except that
    no Commissioner may serve in excess of twelve years. Under this provision,
    the Commissioner can serve on a holdover basis unless and until the President
    appoints a successor who is confirmed by the Senate.2
    In sum, we recommend that if the President wishes to have the Commis­
    sioner continue to serve as a member of the United States Parole Commission,
    the Commissioner should be treated as a holdover appointee. This course of
    action will preserve the Executive Branch position on the unconstitutionality of
    congressional reappointment provisions such as § 235(b)(2) and, at the same
    time, allow the President’s choice for the Commissioner position to continue
    serving in that position without renomination.
    J o h n O . M c G in n is
    Acting D eputy Assistant Attorney General
    Office o f Legal Counsel
    1 See M em orandum for the Associate A ttorney G eneral from Theodore B. O lson, A ssistant Attorney
    G eneral, O ffice o f Legal Counsel (Jan. 13, 1982); M em orandum for the A ssociate Attorney G eneral from
    T heodore B. O lson, A ssistant Attorney G eneral, O ffice o f L egal Counsel (Aug. 11, 1981).
    2 S ection 2 3 5 (b )(2 ) is operative “[n o tw ith sta n d in g the provisions o f § 4202 o f T itle 18,” the section that
    creates the Parole C om m ission and estab lish es its structure, including the holdover m echanism. This lan­
    guage is p roperly read to suspend operation o f § 4202 oniy to the extent that such suspension is necessary to
    give effe c t to the extended terms o f o ffice fo r incum bent com m issioners. A ccordingly, if § 235(b)(2) is
    unco n stitu tio n al, 18 U .S.C . §4202, inclu d in g its holdover provision, w ould rem ain operative. Indeed
    § 235(b)(1)(A ), w hich is clearly severable from § 235(b)(2), expressly extends the operation o f § 4202.
    136
    

Document Info

Filed Date: 11/2/1987

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 1/29/2017