Article III, Section 1:

The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

The Supreme Court has stated, “The Compensation Clause has its roots in the longstanding Anglo-American tradition of an independent Judiciary. A Judiciary free from control by the Executive and the Legislature is essential if there is a right to have claims decided by judges who are free from potential domination by other branches of government.” 1 Before the Revolutionary War, American colonists recognized the role of judicial compensation in maintaining the independence of the Judiciary. Among other things, the Declaration of Independence objected to the fact that the King had “made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.” 2

From the beginning of the Constitutional Convention, the Framers embraced salary protection as one means of bolstering judicial independence. The first resolution on the Judiciary introduced at the Convention provided that judges would “receive punctually at stated times fixed compensation for their services, in which no increase or diminution shall be made so as to affect the persons actually in office at the time of such increase or diminution.” 3 Following debate, the prohibition on judicial salary increases was removed to allow Congress to adapt judicial pay to changing circumstances, but the prohibition on decreasing judicial salaries remained.4 Alexander Hamilton highlighted the Compensation Clause in the Federalist Papers, asserting that, “next to permanency in office, nothing can contribute more to the independence of the judges than a fixed provision for their support,” because, “[i]n the general course of human nature, a power over a man’s subsistence amounts to a power over his will.” 5 Chief Justice John Marshall later asserted that judges must have the independence to protect the poor and unpopular, and that the “greatest scourge” was an “ignorant, a corrupt, or a dependent Judiciary.” 6

Footnotes

1

United States v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 217–18 (1980).

2

The Declaration of Independence para. 11 (U.S. 1776).

3

1 The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, at 244 (Max Farrand ed., 1911).

4

2 id. at 45. See also, e.g., id (statement of Gouverner Morris that “[t]he value of money may not only alter but the State of Society may alter. In this event the same quantity of wheat, the same value would not be the same compensation. The Amount of salaries must always be regulated by the manners & the style of living in a Country” ).

5

The Federalist No. 79 (Alexander Hamilton).

6

United States v. Hatter, 532 U.S. 557 (2001) (quoting Proceedings and Debates of the Virginia State Convention, of 1829–1830, p. 619 (1830)).