President Donald Trump got another win from the Supreme Court Monday after the conservative majority allowed him to fire the heads of independent federal agencies – though they declined his push to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook.
In decisions handed down on one of the last days of the Supreme Court’s term, the justices first declined to take up the president’s request that they allow him to fire Cook on allegations of mortgage fraud, thwarting his attempts to install his allies on the Federal Reserve.
That decision in Trump v. Cook means Cook will remain on the Board of Governors.
But in Trump v. Slaughter, the court ruled 6-3 that the president had the authority to fire the leaders of independent agencies, reversing the 91-year-old precedent set in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, which determined Congress is permitted to limit the president’s power to fire certain government officials.
The case is just the latest example of the Supreme Court repeatedly awarding Trump’s request to expand his executive power. Over the last two years, the conservative majority has granted the president immunity from official actions, restricted nationwide injunctions to allow some of his policies to move forward and consistently responded to the administration’s emergency requests via the shadow docket.
Now, presidents will be permitted to fire people such as Rebecca Slaughter, a Democratic appointee on the Federal Trade Commission.
Trump called the decision a “BIG WIN” in a Truth Social post and said he was honored to be the president who won more authority.
“This Decision was long sought by United States Presidents, dating all the way back to the 1930s. It is such an Honor to be the sitting President who won this Historic and Unprecedented Ruling, one of the most important ever given with respect to Presidential Powers,” Trump wrote.
Slaughter sued the president after he fired her in March 2025 on grounds she was “inconsistent” with his administration’s priorities, and cited his Article II power as justification. It was part of Trump’s larger push to stack his government with loyal officials while also dramatically downsizing the size of the federal workforce.
Slaughter argued that while the Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 gave the president the power to remove an FTC commissioner, it could only be for “inefficiency, neglect of duty or malfeasance in office.”
At least two other former officials, also ousted by Trump on similar terms, have sued the administration. The Supreme Court temporarily allowed the administration to fire them while the case was being argued.
The ruling could have a domino effect on a dozen other independent agencies that enjoyed protections against arbitrary firings, including the National Labor Relations Board, the Merit Systems Protection Board and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who wrote the dissenting opinion, warned that Monday’s ruling would leave Trump with “far greater power than ever before.”
“It is a power, however, that neither the People, nor Congress, nor the Constitution bestowed upon him. In granting the President this unbridled authority, the Court upends its precedent, misconstrues our history, and sheds any pretense of judicial modesty,” Sotomayor wrote.
While the court has officially expanded Trump’s authority, its decision to keep Cook on the board indicates it sees some limitations to presidential authority – though its reason for allowing Cook to remain was narrow.
Chief Justice John Roberts, joined by Justices Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh and Ketanji Brown Jackson, said the Trump administration did not give Cook full due process to fight the allegations raised against her.
Cook can remain on the board while her case is sent back down to lower courts to determine the facts.
However, the court’s ruling did not address whether or not the president is permitted to fire Federal Reserve governors.
“Today’s interim ruling does not decide whether the President may lawfully remove Governor Cook for cause,” Kavanaugh wrote. “The ultimate decision about whether the President may remove Governor Cook for cause will largely depend on the facts regarding the Governor’s actions.”
Calling the ruling “strictly procedural,” Trump said on Truth Social that he plans to continue pushing to have Cook removed.
“… We will take appropriate action immediately to make sure that someone who has committed wrongdoing will not be making vital decisions concerning the Welfare of the United States of America,” he wrote.
Trump attempted to remove Cook, who has been a Federal Reserve governor since 2022, in August via Truth Social, claiming she declared two separate properties as her primary residence to obtain favorable terms. Cook denied the allegations, saying she had always referred to her condo in Atlanta as a “vacation home” in documents.
The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 gives the president the power to remove a person from the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors “for cause” – however, the statute fails to define what “for cause” means.
During oral arguments in January, justices from across the ideological spectrum cautioned that a ruling in favor of Trump could undermine the Federal Reserve’s independence. The Fed was deliberately established separately from the White House and Congress to prevent politics from influencing monetary decisions, such as setting interest rates.
