In the case of Wiener v. United States, 1957, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Mr. Wiener who had been removed from his position as a member of the War Claims Commission by President Eisenhower without cause or explanation. The court held that since Congress intended for this commission to function independently and free from political influence, its members could not be dismissed at will by the president. This decision was based on an interpretation of legislative intent rather than constitutional separation-of-powers principles; it did not establish a general rule against presidential removal power but instead focused on specific statutory protections for certain independent agencies created by Congress.

In the dissenting opinion for Wiener v. United States, Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and could potentially undermine executive power. He contended that President Eisenhower had full authority to remove War Claims Commissioner Wiener from his position without cause under Article II of the Constitution, which grants broad powers to the president over executive branch officials. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's interpretation of legislative intent behind creating independent agencies like War Claims Commission; arguing instead that Congress did not intend to limit presidential removal power when it established such bodies. Therefore, in his view, there was no legal or constitutional basis for preventing a president from dismissing an official serving at their pleasure within an independent agency.