Updated

Updated · The Guardian · Jul 14

Supreme Court Expands Presidential Firing Power in 6-3 Ruling, Overturning 1935 Agency Protections

Updated

Updated · The Guardian · Jul 14

Supreme Court Expands Presidential Firing Power in 6-3 Ruling, Overturning 1935 Agency Protections

Q: What legal principle now distinguishes the Federal Reserve from other agencies whose leaders the President can freely remove?

The Federal Reserve is now distinguished by its statutory **for-cause removal protection**, reinforced by the Supreme Court’s view that the Fed occupies a **special historical and constitutional position** because of central bank independence. In the companion case *Trump v. Cook*, the Court did not extend the broad removal rule from *Trump v. Slaughter* to the Federal Reserve. Instead, it preserved the rule that a Fed governor cannot be removed at will, but only for legally sufficient cause. The Court also indicated that this standard carries procedural safeguards, including notice, an opportunity to respond, and judicial review of whether cause actually exists. What sets the Fed apart is not just the wording of the statute, but the Court’s reasoning that monetary policy has long been treated differently from ordinary executive functions. Chief Justice Roberts pointed to the nation’s tradition of shielding central banking from political interference and described the Federal Reserve as having a “special constitutional and historical position.” So, while *Slaughter* made leaders of most independent agencies freely removable by the President, the Federal Reserve remains protected, for now, by a narrower legal principle: **its governors are removable only for cause, reflecting the judiciary’s recognition of the Fed’s unique independence in monetary policy.**

3 articles · Updated · The Guardian · Jul 14

A 6-3 Supreme Court ruling on June 29 let presidents remove members of independent federal agencies more freely, ending a 91-year-old limit rooted in the 1935 Humphrey’s Executor precedent.
The case arose after Trump fired FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter and fellow Democrat Alvaro Bedoya in March 2025; Slaughter sued, briefly won reinstatement, then lost after the court took up the case.
Slaughter and fired Merit Systems Protection Board member Cathy Harris said the decision weakens civil-service protections, invites political interference and patronage, and could deter people from federal service.
More than 50 federal officials have been fired since Trump returned to office in January 2025, with other cases still pending, including National Mediation Board member Deirdre Hamilton’s challenge.
Trump called Trump v Slaughter a "big win," while critics warned the ruling could reshape how independent agencies police business, hiring and labor disputes across government.

Sources

Left100%

The Guardian4h ago

Supreme Court Increases Presidential Power Over Independent Agencies in Trump v Slaughter Ruling

AOL4h ago

Victims of Trump purge call supreme court ruling a 'dagger in heart' to civil service - AOL

Slate17h ago

The Supreme Court gave Donald Trump a new power to break the government.

6 Sources

When does a president's power to fire officials conflict with the constitutional duty to ensure government agencies can still function?

How will the shift to at-will employment for senior officials impact the government's ability to retain nonpartisan expert talent?

What legal principle now distinguishes the Federal Reserve from other agencies whose leaders the President can freely remove?

Supreme Court’s 2026 Ruling in Trump v. Slaughter: Presidential Power Over Independent Agencies Dramatically Expanded

Overview

On June 29, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark 6-3 decision in Trump v. Slaughter, dramatically expanding presidential power by allowing the president to remove heads of independent federal agencies at will. This ruling overturned the nearly century-old precedent set by Humphrey's Executor v. United States, which had protected agency independence. Chief Justice John Roberts argued that the Federal Trade Commission exercises executive power and must be under presidential control. As a result, the Court ruled that officials like Rebecca Slaughter at the FTC could be dismissed by the president, marking a major shift in the balance of power within the federal government.

...