介绍： 美国宪法appointment clause规定，如果是Officers of the United States，则需要总统的任命+ advice/consent of Senate.除非是inferior officer，只要Congress立法的时候有规定一个任命的程序，就不需要满足Appointment Clause. 本案中，斯卡利亚大法官作出和1988年不同的规则，即要看这个officer是否inferior，就是看职务表上这个职位...

介绍： 美国宪法appointment clause规定，如果是Officers of the United States，则需要总统的任命+ advice/consent of Senate.除非是inferior officer，只要Congress立法的时候有规定一个任命的程序，就不需要满足Appointment Clause. 本案中，斯卡利亚大法官作出和1988年不同的规则，即要看这个officer是否inferior，就是看职务表上这个职位上面还有没有人管得住这个人，如果没人管他，那么这个人就不是inferior officers，如果不是inferior就必须满足Appoint的要求：总统的任命+ advice/consent of Senate
The Appointments Clause requires appointments of all federal officers to be made by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, except that inferior officers, only inferior officers may have Congress, so provides be appointed by the President alone by Heads of Departments or by the Courts of Law.
Generally speaking, inferior officers are officers whose work is directed and supervised at some level by others who were appointed by presidential nomination with the Senate's advice and consent.
Supervision of the work of Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals judges is divided between the General Counsel of the Department of Transportation, who is subordinate to the Secretary of Transportation, and the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.
Significantly, these judges have no power to render a final decision on behalf of the United States, unless permitted to do so by other executive officers.
They are, in our view, inferior officers within the meaning of Article II.