October Term 2016 · Docket 15-1251
Can a nominee serve as acting official for their own office?
The Board argues the Vacancies Act bars self-appointment. The company claims the law allows it.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
General Gershengorn argued the Vacancies Act limits self-appointment to first assistants.
Mr. Dvoretzky argued the statute's broad terms compel a different interpretation.
Justice Kagan questioned the practical effect of removing specific statutory language.
Justice Ginsburg referenced Senator Byrd's view on the statutory construction.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 46-4 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 46-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 6-36 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 6-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 28-34 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 28-34
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 4-20 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 4-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 46-48 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 46-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 30-10 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 30-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-50 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 52-8 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 52-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 8-18 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 34-50 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 34-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 4-4 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 4-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 46-6 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 46-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 8-28 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 8-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 40-8 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 40-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 32-46 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 32-46
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The dispute centers on the Vacancies Reform Act. The Board says the law blocks a nominee from acting in their own office. The company argues the statute permits this arrangement. The Court must interpret the statutory text and legislative history.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 30-10 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 30-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-50 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-50
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 7, 2016.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 8-18 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-18
What each side wants
The Board wants the Court to declare the acting appointment invalid.
The company wants the Court to uphold the acting appointment.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 30-10 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 30-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-50 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-50
What each side says
The Board argues the statute's broad terms prohibit self-appointment.
The company argues the statute limits the ban to first assistants only.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 30-10 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 30-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-50 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-50
What the justices asked
Justice Ginsburg asked about Senator Byrd's construction of the law.
Justice Kagan asked about the effect of removing specific statutory words.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 46-4 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 46-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 6-36 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 6-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 28-34 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 28-34
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 4-20 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 4-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 46-48 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 46-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 52-8 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 52-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 34-50 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 34-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 4-4 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 4-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 46-6 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 46-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 8-28 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 8-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 40-8 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 40-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 32-46 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 32-46
Why it matters
This case defines the limits of executive branch appointments. It clarifies who may serve as acting officials. The outcome shapes future administrative agency leadership structures.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 30-10 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 30-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-50 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-50
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 46-4 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 46-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 6-36 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 6-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 28-34 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 28-34
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 4-20 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 4-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 46-48 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 46-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 52-8 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 52-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 8-18 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 34-50 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 34-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 4-4 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 4-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 46-6 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 46-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 8-28 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 8-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 40-8 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 40-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 32-46 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 32-46
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 30-10 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 30-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-50 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 30-10 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 30-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-50 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-50
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.