Daijiworld Media Network – Washington
Washington, Dec 9: The US Supreme Court’s conservative majority on Monday indicated strong support for President Donald Trump’s bid to assert direct control over independent federal agencies — a move that could overturn a key 1935 precedent and fundamentally reshape the structure of the American government.
At the heart of the case is Trump’s March decision to remove Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, despite a federal law requiring “cause” for firing members of multi-member independent boards. After two-and-a-half hours of arguments, the court’s six conservative justices appeared aligned with Trump’s position, while the three-member liberal bloc firmly opposed it. A ruling is expected by June.
Liberals warn of ‘Destroying Government Structure’
Justice Sonia Sotomayor led the liberal attack, warning Solicitor General D. John Sauer that allowing presidents unrestricted power to remove independent agency heads would strip Congress of its authority to create bodies insulated from political pressure.
“You’re asking us to destroy the structure of government,” she said, questioning which agencies would fall next if the FTC’s protections were removed.
But conservative justices flipped the argument, asking Slaughter’s attorney whether Congress could then restrict a president’s ability to fire Cabinet secretaries — a move they said would itself “upend” the government. Justice Brett Kavanaugh questioned how unelected agency leaders could wield “massive power over individual liberty and billion-dollar industries” without presidential oversight.
Sauer argued that greater accountability to the president would strengthen democratic control. “The sky will not fall,” he said.
Push to overturn 1935 landmark ruling
Trump is seeking to overturn Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, the 1935 ruling that has protected independent agencies such as the FCC, NRC and NTSB for nearly 90 years. Justice Neil Gorsuch called the precedent “poorly reasoned”, echoing Chief Justice John Roberts, who labelled it a “dried husk”.
Sauer urged the court to explicitly overrule the decision, calling it a “decaying husk with dangerous pretensions” that has tied lower courts in knots. While some courts sided with officials removed by Trump this year, a Washington DC appeals court last week ruled the precedent did not protect them.
Trump immunity ruling looms over arguments
The court’s controversial decision last year granting presidents immunity for official acts resurfaced repeatedly. Roberts, writing then, had said the president’s power to remove executive officers “may not be regulated by Congress”, a line Sauer used to bolster Trump’s case.
Justice Gorsuch pressed Slaughter’s lawyer, questioning how criminal agencies must answer to the president while civil regulators imposing “ruinous fines” could remain insulated.
Federal reserve case in the background
Trump’s attempt to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook also loomed large. While the court has treated the Fed as more protected than other agencies, Kavanaugh signalled sympathy for concerns that Trump’s arguments could eventually undermine the central bank’s independence.
Justice Elena Kagan warned that the administration’s logic had “no stopping point”.
Judicial power questioned
The justices also examined whether courts can reinstate wrongfully fired officials — something the Trump administration argues they cannot do. Kavanaugh pushed back, saying that stance would allow presidents to illegally fire officials with no remedy. “I have some real doubts about that argument,” he said.
As the case enters its final stretch, the conservative majority will decide whether to hollow out the 1935 precedent or strike it down entirely — a decision with consequences extending far beyond the FTC and deep into the future of American governance.