The Supreme Court is set to hear a pivotal case on March 6, 2023, that could redefine the balance of power between the presidency and independent agencies. The case centers on President Donald Trump‘s decision to fire Rebecca Kelly Slaughter from her position as a commissioner at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). This action raises significant questions about the extent of presidential authority over independent regulatory bodies, potentially impacting federal governance as a whole.
At the heart of the dispute is a federal law designed to shield FTC commissioners from political pressure. This law stipulates that commissioners may only be removed for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” Trump has not offered any of these justifications for Slaughter’s dismissal, leading to a prolonged legal battle that began when he returned to power in January 2023. The outcome of this case is likely to influence numerous other cases involving similar separation of powers issues.
The Supreme Court’s ruling could dismantle a longstanding precedent established in the 1935 case, Humphrey’s Executor v. US. This case allowed Congress to dictate the terms for removing leaders of independent agencies. Legal experts suggest that the court’s conservative majority has shown increasing skepticism toward these protective measures. The liberal justices have expressed concern that recent emergency orders threaten to undermine this historical ruling.
In legal briefs, Slaughter’s attorneys argue that overturning such a precedent would disrupt the foundational principles of American governance. They stated, “Overruling a century of precedent at this late date … would profoundly destabilize institutions that are now inextricably intertwined with the fabric of American governance.”
Conversely, the Trump administration contends that the Constitution grants the president broad authority to oversee the executive branch. Solicitor General D. John Sauer framed independent agencies as a “myth,” asserting that allowing these bodies to operate with autonomy from the executive branch poses a danger to liberty. Sauer referenced Justice Neil Gorsuch, who had previously voiced similar views regarding the accountability of executive power.
The Supreme Court, which currently holds a 6-3 conservative majority, has previously indicated its inclination towards limiting for-cause protections for executive branch officials. In a 2019 ruling, the court deemed the protections for the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to violate separation-of-powers principles. Chief Justice John Roberts articulated that the president’s power to remove and supervise executive officials is rooted in the Constitution.
As the court prepares to deliberate Slaughter’s case, it has also agreed to consider whether federal courts have the authority to prevent a person’s removal from public office. This aspect of the case could further clarify the judicial role in executive dismissals, potentially limiting courts from ordering reinstatement of fired officials.
The court’s decision to link Slaughter’s case with another appeal concerning an official from the Library of Congress suggests a broader interest in how these cases intersect. The implications of the court’s ruling could extend well beyond the FTC, affecting numerous independent agencies that operate under similar frameworks.
Rebecca Kelly Slaughter was originally appointed to the FTC by Trump in 2018 and later nominated for a second term by President Joe Biden. Her confirmation by the Senate was unanimous, illustrating bipartisan support for her role. The FTC, responsible for enforcing antitrust and consumer protection laws, comprises five members who serve staggered seven-year terms, ensuring a balance of political affiliations.
In July 2022, a federal district court ordered Slaughter’s reinstatement after her dismissal, a ruling the Washington, DC, appeals court chose not to overturn. The Supreme Court permitted Trump to keep Slaughter from returning to her position while the legal proceedings continue, a move that has drawn scrutiny given the potential ramifications for independent agencies.
The Humphrey’s Executor case dates back to the presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt, when he dismissed an FTC commissioner appointed by Herbert Hoover. The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the dismissal was improper, establishing a critical precedent for the independence of regulatory bodies. The upcoming ruling on Slaughter’s case could either reinforce or dismantle this foundational principle, with significant consequences for the future of governance in the United States.
