On Monday, the Supreme Court deliberated on a pivotal case that could fundamentally alter the long-standing concept of independent federal agencies operating at an arm's length from presidential influence. The court, which holds a conservative majority, is examining whether former President Donald Trump possessed the authority to dismiss a member of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), despite existing congressional laws designed to protect the agency from political pressures.
The Supreme Court has indicated, amidst strong dissent from the three liberal justices, that Trump is likely to prevail in this case. This ruling could allow Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, a commissioner appointed by the Democrats, to be removed from her position while legal proceedings continue. Slaughter, along with another Democratic appointee of the FTC, was dismissed by Trump in March. Currently, the FTC is functioning with only two of its five commissioners, both of whom are Republican appointees.
Since taking office in January, Trump has aggressively pursued a strategy to reshape the federal government. His administration has focused on downsizing agencies he perceives as unfavorable, withholding funds approved by Congress, and terminating thousands of federal employees. The MAGA movement and associated business entities have consistently criticized federal workers and independent agencies, labeling them as part of a “deep state” that operates beyond public accountability.
Independent agencies established by Congress, such as the FTC, wield significant regulatory power and have historically faced opposition from business interests. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the nation’s largest business organization, has filed a brief in support of the administration regarding Slaughter’s dismissal. Trump's legal team is advocating for the unitary executive theory, which posits that the president holds exclusive authority under Article 2 of the Constitution to exercise executive power, including regulatory decisions.
The legal framework surrounding the FTC is dictated by a 1914 law, which stipulates that members can only be removed for reasons such as “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” Similar restrictions apply to other independent agencies. Nonetheless, Trump has dismissed members from the FTC and various other agencies that oversee essential health, safety, labor, and environmental regulations, including the Consumer Product Safety Commission and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
One of the central legal questions before the Supreme Court is whether to overturn a 1935 ruling, Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, which upheld restrictions on the president’s ability to fire FTC members. Additionally, the court must consider whether Slaughter has any legal recourse to remain in her position if the court finds her firing was unlawful. This ruling would not only affect the FTC but also a range of other federal agencies with similar protections.
In allowing Trump to dismiss Slaughter, the Supreme Court also signaled potential firings at other impacted agencies, indicating a majority inclination towards Trump’s stance. This has drawn significant criticism, particularly concerning the court’s frequent rulings favoring Trump through emergency orders that bypassed traditional oral arguments or detailed written opinions. A notable exception has been Trump’s attempt to remove Lisa Cook, a member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors; the court has suggested that the Fed may possess a distinct structure that could shield it from such dismissals. Arguments in Cook’s case are scheduled for January.
As the Supreme Court continues to weigh these critical issues, the implications for the future of independent federal agencies, their regulatory authority, and the balance of power within the federal government remain profound. This case will likely set significant precedents for the relationship between the presidency and independent regulatory bodies.