Supreme Court Reviews Trump’s Bid to Expand Power Over Agencies

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration’s efforts to increase presidential authority over independent federal agencies without the consent of Congress have landed at the Supreme Court. Presently, the court is deliberating whether to reverse the 1930s landmark precedent which limits the president's power to dismiss certain officials.

It is a question based on President Donald Trump's decision to remove without cause, Rebecca Slaughter, a member of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The administration contends that based on the Constitution; the president should have the liberty to remove an agency official from his side without any explanation. Consequently, it challenges the 1935 Supreme Court decision in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, which safeguards independent agency members that make up the commission.

Arguments will be made before the court on Monday.

The court's six conservative justices have on different occasions indicated that they are in favor of the idea that the president should have more control over independent agencies. Also, their recent decisions show that they might be willing to change or repeal the precedent that has been in place for a long time.

The Trump administration sees this decision as incompatible with constitutional principles and very much of the past. It stresses out the necessity for the president to have full authority to remove executive branch officials as he sees fit - a position very consistent with a strong-unitary-executive theory of presidential power.

Applying this logic, Trump has gotten rid of people who were in agencies such as the National Labor Relations Board, the Merit Systems Protection Board, and the Consumer Product Safety Commission, etc., by firing them. However, only in the case of Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook has a significant change in the structure resulted from these operations.

On the other hand, Fed Governor Lisa Cook, in response to her removal, challenged it. Still, the Supreme Court seemed to suggest she might be an exception due to the Fed’s unique independence. In his opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch points out that even if her firing were deemed illegal, courts are reluctant to interfere with the central bank during times of economic uncertainty.

In January, the Court will hear additional arguments on whether Cook can remain in her position while the litigation continues.

Through a series of decisions in which he has participated since 2010, Chief Justice John Roberts has been progressively lessening the limitations imposed upon the president's power to remove officials. In one of his decisions dated 2020, Roberts sided with the president in his effort to remove the director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau although the director was protected by law as in the case of Humphrey's Executor.

Details of the present case are rooted in the past when the then FTC commissioner William Humphrey declined the resignation request of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. After his demise, the court decision in a lawsuit for wages resulting from the death established that one can only be removed from the position of commissioner if it is for a justified cause thus laying down the legal basis for independent agencies.

Should the Court make a decision in favor of Trump, the President could have more freedom to regulate the authorities that monitor labor, finance, and consumer safety issues, among others. Nevertheless, if the court reaffirms the decision in Humphrey’s Executor, it will be conserving the existing framework which is meant to safeguard agencies from political meddling.

It is quite likely that the final decision of the Court which is anticipated in a near future will be pivotal in determining the degree of presidential power defining on one hand and the scope of intervention of independent regulatory bodies on the other side. Many legal experts and public officials are anxiously waiting for the verdict, being conscious that it may affect presidential authority and administrative governance for a long time to come.