The Supreme Court case that could hand Trump unchecked power to fire agency heads
Briefly

The Supreme Court case that could hand Trump unchecked power to fire agency heads
"Over the past decade, the Supreme Court has weakened Humphrey's Executor, ruling in 2020 and 2021 that single-director agencies cannot shield their leaders from presidential removal. This year, the court greenlit Trump's removal of members from multimember boards like the National Labor Relations Board. Context: Trump moved to fire both Slaughter and fellow Democratic FTC Commissioner Alvaro Bedoya earlier this year. In an email to Bedoya reviewed by Axios, an official writing on behalf of the president said Bedoya's "continued service on the FTC is inconsistent with my Administration's policies." State of play: A federal judge blocked Slaughter's removal in July, a decision upheld by an appeals court in September. But the Supreme Court's conservative majority intervened, using its emergency docket to let Trump fire Slaughter while it considered his authority over independent agencies."
"Friction point: "Our emergency docket should never be used, as it has been this year, to permit what our own precedent bars," Justice Elena Kagan wrote in her dissent. "Still more, it should not be used, as it also has been, to transfer government authority from Congress to the President, and thus to reshape the Nation's separation of powers.""
The Supreme Court has narrowed Humphrey's Executor over the past decade, including 2020 and 2021 rulings that limit protections for single-director agencies. The court recently allowed the removal of members from multimember boards such as the National Labor Relations Board. President Trump moved to remove FTC Commissioners Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya; an email to Bedoya said his continued FTC service was inconsistent with Administration policies. A federal judge blocked Slaughter's removal and an appeals court upheld that block, but the Supreme Court's conservative majority used the emergency docket to permit the firing while it reviews presidential authority over independent agencies. Justice Kagan dissented.
Read at Axios
Unable to calculate read time
[
|
]