Justices Question President’s Power to Control Board’s $500K Salaries
Members of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board make more than $500,000 a year, and the president can do little about it, conservative justices suggested in oral arguments yesterday on the board’s constitutionality.
Critics say the watchdog board created by the Sarbanes-Oxley law to oversee accounting firms is doubly insulated from presidential review, the New York Times reports. Members of the board can be removed only for cause, and only by the Securities and Exchange Commission. The president can remove SEC commissioners, but only for cause.
Challengers to the law contend the appointments procedure undermines the president’s appointments authority and violates separation of powers. Conservative justices appeared sympathetic to that view, according to the Dow Jones newswire.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. referred to the double layers of insulation as “for-cause squared” and suggested that Congress had gone too far in restricting the executive branch.
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. asked what the president could do if he objects to the big $500,000 salaries of board members. Solicitor General Elena Kagan replied that the president could call the SEC chairman or commissioners and say, “I have a problem with this.”
Justice Antonin Scalia appeared skeptical about the impact. “I could do that,” he said.
The Washington Post reports that Justice Anthony M. Kennedy may be the swing vote in the case, and he appeared skeptical of arguments that the SEC had extensive control of the board. However, the National Law Journal said the justices appeared ready to back Kagan’s argument that the president had “constitutionally sufficient control” over the board.
The case is Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board.
