The Supreme Court began hearing arguments on a critical case that could profoundly impact the structure of the U.S. government. The case centers on whether President Trump had the authority to remove Rebecca Kelly Slaughter from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), challenging a precedent that protects independent agencies.
Slaughter was initially appointed to the FTC in 2018 during Trump’s first term to fill a Democratic seat. She was reappointed by President Biden for a term set to expire in 2029. However, she was abruptly removed in March by the White House, citing that her continued service conflicted with Trump administration priorities, without any additional explanation.
The FTC was established in 1914 as a bipartisan agency to regulate competition and protect the economy. By law, its five commissioners are limited in number from the same political party and can only be removed for cause, such as inefficiency or malfeasance. Slaughter challenged her firing, and a lower court ruled her removal unlawful, ordering her reinstatement. However, the Supreme Court allowed her firing to stand temporarily after a 6-3 vote, pending a full review.
The legal debate revisits a landmark 1935 ruling known as Humphrey’s Executor, which curbed presidential power to remove certain independent agency officials. The court then emphasized that agencies like the FTC operate with quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial functions, thus limiting executive control. Since then, Congress has created multiple similar agencies protected by for-cause removal provisions.
The Trump administration contests Humphrey’s Executor, arguing that the FTC exercises executive power that should make commissioners removable at will. Recent court rulings, including one from the D.C. Circuit, have echoed this view by permitting removal from agencies with significant executive authority.
The case highlights deep divisions over the independence of federal agencies. Slaughter asserts that independence ensures fair and merit-based decisions benefiting Americans. Critics like attorney James M. Burnham dismiss the notion of independent agencies, contending that removal protections are unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court will continue examining related issues when it hears arguments regarding President Trump’s attempt to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook in January. These decisions could reshape the balance of power among the branches of government for decades to come.
Read more at: www.npr.org-
-
-
-
