Court Ends FTC Firing Limits but Blocks Trump’s Removal of Fed Governor Cook

The Supreme Court on Monday handed President Trump a sweeping win over independent agencies and, in a separate case, a defeat over the Federal Reserve. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote both opinions, which together draw a line between ordinary regulators the president can fire at will and the central bank that sets U.S. interest rates.

In Trump v. Slaughter, the justices ruled 6-3 that the law shielding Federal Trade Commission members from removal except for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance” is unconstitutional, overruling the 1935 precedent Humphrey’s Executor v. United States. Roberts wrote that the FTC “unquestionably exercises executive power” and that “subordinates who exercise the President’s power are subject to removal by him,” according to CBS News. Trump had fired Democratic commissioner Rebecca Slaughter in March 2025.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissented and read a summary from the bench. She wrote that the decision “gives the President a power unknown even to the English Crown,” SCOTUSblog reported, and warned that agencies such as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission would likely become purely executive. Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote a separate concurrence saying the ruling was a “notable step back toward the Constitution” but not sufficient on its own, according to SCOTUSblog. Trump called it the “Greatest Increase in Presidential Power in the last 100 years” on Truth Social, according to CBS News.

Supporters of the ruling argue that officials who wield executive power should answer to an elected president. The dissent’s counter is that Congress deliberately built bipartisan commissions to be insulated from politics. CBS News reported that the logic could reach more than two dozen multimember agencies, including the National Labor Relations Board.

In Trump v. Cook, the Court voted 5-4 to leave Fed Governor Lisa Cook in her seat while her lawsuit proceeds. Roberts was joined by Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, NBC News reported. He wrote that treating the Fed’s for-cause protection as unreviewable would turn it into at-will employment, which conflicts with the statute and with the tradition of central bank independence. Any definition of “cause,” he wrote, must reflect the Fed’s “unique historical status and role.”

Roberts also wrote that Cook is entitled to notice and some opportunity to respond before any removal, which would not require a full trial and could be satisfied with written materials, NBC News reported. He left open whether Trump can remove her for cause, saying the answer “will depend in part on the underlying facts.” The Court did not weigh the merits of the mortgage allegations that Trump has cited, which Cook denies.

Cook called the attempted removal a “manufactured pretext” for refusing to bow to political pressure over interest rates, NBC News reported. Trump said he would “take appropriate action immediately” regarding her. Bill Pulte, who made the mortgage allegations, said on X that he believes Cook will be indicted.

The Slaughter opinion did not address the Fed’s removal protections; Roberts said the Fed is not necessarily covered, to the extent it follows the historical tradition of the First and Second Banks of the United States, SCOTUSblog reported. The rulings come as the Senate has recently confirmed Kevin Warsh to replace Jerome Powell as Fed chair, NBC News reported. The Court left for “another day” whether judges on the Tax Court and the Court of Federal Claims have the same protections, so the question of who the president may fire is far from closed.