Supreme Court to Reevaluate Presidential Authority Over Independent Agencies
The United States Supreme Court announced on Monday its decision to evaluate the extent of the president’s power over independent agencies, potentially overturning a longstanding precedent established nearly 90 years ago. This move could redefine the conditions under which presidents can dismiss members of agency boards.
In a recent 6-3 decision, the court permitted President Donald Trump to proceed with the dismissal of Rebecca Slaughter, a Democratic member of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). This decision comes as part of a broader examination into a 1935 ruling that restricts the president’s ability to remove commissioners, except in cases of misconduct or neglect.
The conservative majority of the court has suggested that the president should generally have the authority to remove board members, given that these agencies perform executive functions. However, the Federal Reserve may be an exception, as indicated by the case involving the dismissal of Fed Governor Lisa Cook.
Justice Elena Kagan, along with Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, opposed the decision to allow Slaughter’s removal. Justice Kagan expressed concern over the court’s recent rulings, which have consistently favored expanding presidential control over independent agencies. She stated, “Congress, as everyone agrees, prohibited each of those presidential removals. Yet the majority, stay order by stay order, has handed full control of all those agencies to the President.”
The court is set to hear arguments in December regarding the possible overturn of the decision from Humphrey’s Executor. The original ruling stemmed from a case where the court supported an FTC commissioner who had been dismissed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt. The ruling has enabled independent federal agencies to operate with significant autonomy in areas like labor relations and employment discrimination.
The current administration argues that the president should have the authority to dismiss board members to effectively implement his agenda. Solicitor General D. John Sauer emphasized, “The President and the government suffer irreparable harm when courts transfer even some of that executive power to officers beyond the President’s control.” He also noted that the judiciary lacks the authority to reinstate individuals, echoing sentiments from Justice Neil Gorsuch who mentioned that dismissed employees might receive back pay but not reinstatement.
Opponents, including Slaughter’s legal team, caution that allowing the president to freely dismiss congressionally confirmed board members could lead to regulatory decisions driven more by political considerations than by expert judgment. They argue that any expansion of presidential powers should be determined by elected representatives.
The Supreme Court’s decision to review this matter comes as the case is still progressing through the lower courts. The justices declined to consider similar cases involving Gwynne Wilcox of the National Labor Relations Board and Cathy Harris of the Merit Systems Protection Board.
The FTC is tasked with enforcing consumer protection and antitrust laws. Meanwhile, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) oversees union elections and investigates unfair labor practices, and the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) handles disputes involving federal employees.
For further updates on the U.S. Supreme Court, visit https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court. For more information on the Federal Trade Commission, visit https://apnews.com/hub/federal-trade-commission.
