A Supreme Court case that could have significant ramifications on how the Social Security Administration operates is now upon us.
The Supreme Court of the United States scheduled oral arguments in Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission for April 23.
According to the Supreme Court’s blog, the case involves “the Constitution’s appointments clause, which requires that all ‘officers’ of the United States be appointed by the president, by the ‘courts of law,’ or by the ‘heads of departments.’ Specifically, this case questions the constitutionality of Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), who typically are not appointed by the SEC, president or judicial branch.
The central question, according to the Supreme Court blogger, Ronald Mann, is whether ALJs are considered officers of the SEC. If so they may no have the authority to offer legal decisions because they are not appointed by the agency in which they represent, the president or the judicial branch. Although Lucia v. SEC specifically deals with SEC ALJs, any decision is likely to impact the constitutionality of all ALJs, including the ones who issue decisions regarding Social Security claims.
In the case for the status quo, Mann says the strongest argument is that the ALJs for the SEC are not officers “because nothing they do is actually effective as a decision of the SEC until the SEC approves it – the ALJ decisions are only tentative and have no effect until the SEC acts.” The ALJs for Social Security do provide final decisions on cases, which provides them a bit more authority and if the Court concludes they are officers, this could put them at risk. But, Social Security can and does hold the final word on decision as ALJ decisions can be, although they are typically not, reviewed and reversed.
The Supreme Court will issue an audio recording of the argument April 27, but Mann estimated a decision might not be issued until mid June.
