In a significant ruling that has stirred up discussions about executive authority, the Supreme Court has affirmed President Donald Trump's decision to dismiss Federal Trade Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter. This decision, reached on September 22, 2025, with a vote of 6-3, allows for Trump's action to stand, at least temporarily, while the Court prepares to delve deeper into this contentious issue in December.
While the Supreme Court did not provide a detailed explanation for its ruling, it aligns with a pattern observed in recent decisions by the conservative majority, which tends to favor presidential discretion in appointing and removing officials from independent agencies that wield considerable executive power.
Trump's dismissal of Slaughter, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden, was justified by the president on the grounds of policy disagreements rather than any specific misconduct. This raises an important question: should a president have the authority to remove officials from independent agencies without providing a clear reason?
Dissenting justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson voiced strong objections to the majority's ruling. They pointed out that federal law explicitly states that FTC commissioners can only be removed for cause, referencing a pivotal Supreme Court case, Humphrey's Executor v. US, which established this principle. Kagan, in her dissent, argued, "The president cannot, as he conceded here, fire an FTC Commissioner without any reason. To arrive at a different conclusion would mean overturning the established rule in Humphrey's, effectively disregarding Congress's intent regarding agency structure."
Kagan further criticized the majority for what she perceived as an attempt to undermine the precedent set by Humphrey's without openly acknowledging it or allowing for a thorough discussion. She stated, "The majority may be eager to take that step, but until that happens, Humphrey's remains in effect, preventing the majority from granting the President the unfettered removal power that Congress has explicitly denied him."
The Supreme Court has indicated that it will directly address this precedent in the upcoming December hearing, where it will consider whether the protections against removal for FTC members infringe upon the separation of powers and whether Humphrey's should be overturned.
In a related development, the Court opted not to expedite appeals from Cathy Harris and Gwynne Wilcox, both of whom were dismissed by Trump from their positions on the Merit Systems Protection Board and the National Labor Relations Board, respectively. Their cases also challenge the president's authority under the Humphrey's precedent.
This suggests that the Court is positioning the Slaughter case as a crucial opportunity to clarify significant questions regarding presidential power across more than 50 independent agencies and corporations within the executive branch.
What do you think about the balance of power between the presidency and independent agencies? Should the president have the ability to remove officials without cause? Share your thoughts in the comments!
