Supreme Court expands presidential firing power, overturning 90-year-old ruling

The recent Supreme Court ruling on removal protections for members of the Federal Trade Commission has sent shockwaves through the political landscape. In a landmark decision, the high court declared that Congress cannot shield members of independent agencies from being fired by the president at will, overturning a 90-year-old precedent set in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States.

Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the conservative majority, emphasized that limits on the president’s ability to remove officials who exercise executive powers infringe on his constitutional authority. The ruling, which was supported by the other conservative justices, expands the president’s control over independent boards and commissions, including the FTC.

The implications of this decision extend beyond the FTC to more than two dozen multi-member agencies, such as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the National Labor Relations Board, whose members can now be removed by the president without cause. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in a rare dissent from the bench, warned that the majority’s ruling fundamentally alters the structure of these agencies as intended by Congress.

The case at the center of this ruling, Trump v. Slaughter, involved the removal of Rebecca Slaughter from the FTC by President Trump without cause. Slaughter, who was appointed by both Trump and Biden, challenged her removal in court, leading to a series of legal battles that culminated in the Supreme Court’s decision.

President Trump hailed the ruling as a significant increase in presidential power, emphasizing the importance of the decision at a critical time. The court’s decision in the Slaughter case follows a trend of recent rulings that have chipped away at the New Deal-era precedent, giving the president more authority over independent agencies.

While the Supreme Court’s decision only applies to agencies like the FTC, it does not address tenure protections for judges or the constitutionality of removal restrictions for other entities. The court made it clear that those who fall under the president’s general administrative control must be removable at will, reaffirming the president’s authority over executive branch officials.

Overall, the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Slaughter case marks a significant shift in the balance of power between the executive branch and independent agencies. As the political landscape continues to evolve, the implications of this decision are likely to shape the relationship between the president and these agencies for years to come.