The Myers v. United States case in 1923 revolved around the issue of presidential power to remove appointed officials from their positions without Senate approval. President Woodrow Wilson had removed Frank S. Myers, a postmaster first class, from his position and this action was challenged on the grounds that it violated an 1876 law requiring Senate approval for such removals. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Wilson with a 6-3 majority decision, stating that the president has exclusive authority to remove executive branch officials, and does not need the approval of the Senate or any other legislative body. This ruling effectively invalidated hundreds of laws enacted by Congress over time which required Senatorial consent for dismissal from office appointments made with its advice and consent.

In the dissenting opinion for Myers et al. v. United States, Justice Holmes and Justice Brandeis argued that the President's power to remove appointed officials is not absolute and should be subject to checks by Congress. They contended that while the Constitution does grant certain powers exclusively to specific branches of government, it also allows for shared responsibilities in other areas - including appointments and removals. The justices believed this case was one such instance where Congressional oversight was necessary to prevent potential abuses of executive power. They further pointed out historical precedents where Congress had indeed exercised control over presidential removals without any constitutional objections being raised until then.