Supreme Court: Trump may fire heads of independent agencies, but not the Federal Reserve

WASHINGTON— The Supreme Court on Monday gave President Trump the authority to remove the heads of most independent agencies created by Congress; but not the Federal Reserve.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. He expressed two opinions; One strengthened the president’s authority as chief executive, the second said that this authority did not extend to the Federal Reserve board.

the first one A 6-3 decision. It received the support of five conservatives, while the second 5-4 majority this included three liberals.

Roberts, a former White House counsel, has long been skeptical of independent agencies whose officials can use regulatory authority to contradict the president’s views.

But since the 1880s, Congress has occasionally created independent agencies under the leadership of a bipartisan panel of experts. In 1935, the Supreme Court unanimously approved these multi-member boards and commissions.

But Roberts and the court overturned that precedent and declared it conflicted with the president’s executive authority.

“Our Constitution creates three branches, but only one President,” he wrote. “Discharge[e] In order for the president to carry out his trusted duties, he must have the assistance of officials he can trust. … Subordinates of the President who exercise his authority are subject to removal by him. Only then can they remain accountable to the President, and the President to the people.”

The resolution supports Trump’s firing of Rebecca Slaughter, one of two Democratic appointees to the five-member Federal Trade Commission.

Dissenting, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said it “distorts the structure of government to fit the majority theory of unitary, total executive control. The result is a President who emerges with far greater power than ever before. But it is a power that neither the People, nor Congress, nor the Constitution have granted him.”

The court’s conservatives argue that, under what is called the “unitary executive” theory, the president is entitled to Article II of the Constitution. He believes that the executive authority in Article I overrides Congress’s Article I authority to write laws and structure the government.

Departments and agencies of the federal government exist only because Congress created them by law.

However, in the second opinion, the court blocked Trump’s bid to dismiss Fed Governor Lisa Cook, appointed by President Biden.

Roberts said the history of the central bank dates back to the nation’s founding and that Congress created the Federal Reserve Board in line with “our Nation’s tradition of central banking protected from political interference.”

Trump said in his social media post that he tried to fire Lisa Cook.

But “Federal Reserve Governors do not serve at the whim of the President; instead, they have staggered 14-year terms and can only be removed ‘for cause,'” he wrote.

Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh cast a key vote in support of the Fed’s independence. He said he joined the majority because it “confirms the longstanding historical practice and understanding that the Federal Reserve is an independent institution whose Governors enjoy the protection of cause-based removal, consistent with Article II of the Constitution.”

The court did not ultimately rule on Cook’s case, other than to say that Cook deserved due process. The court said he cannot be dismissed without a hearing and evidence.

However, the failure of independent agencies did not come as a surprise.

Even before Trump’s election, Roberts had insisted that agency officials must be accountable and under the president’s control.

Last year, judges blocked lower court orders that would have reinstated agency officials fired by Trump.

But for most of American history, Congress was understood to have the power to structure the government and create quasi-independent agencies to perform specific tasks, such as regulating railroad rates or the money supply.

These agencies and commissions were led by a bipartisan board of experts appointed for a fixed term. They can only be removed from office for one reason, not a political disagreement with the president.

The Supreme Court upheld these multi-member commissions in 1935 on the grounds that their work was legislative and judicial rather than merely enforcing laws.

But the court’s current conservative majority has argued that these commissions and boards have executive authority and are therefore subject to the president’s direct control.

In creating such bodies, Congress was often responding to the problems of a new age.

The Interstate Commerce Commission was established in 1887 to regulate railroad fares. The FTC, which is the focus of the case, was founded in 1914 to investigate corporate monopolies.

The Federal Reserve Board was established a year ago to supervise banks, prevent panics and regulate the money supply.

During the Great Depression in the 1930s, Congress created the Securities and Exchange Commission to regulate the stock market and the National Labor Relations Board to resolve labor disputes.

Decades later, Congress focused on security. The National Transportation Safety Board was created to investigate aviation accidents, and the Consumer Product Safety Commission investigates products that may pose a hazard. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission protects the public from nuclear hazards.

Typically, Congress has given fixed terms to appointees of Republicans and Democrats and said they can be removed only for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance.”

Slaughter was first appointed to a Democratic seat by Trump and reappointed by Biden to a seven-year term in 2023.