Supreme Court to Review President’s Authority Over Independent Institutions
The Supreme Court is set to reconsider a significant ruling regarding the president’s power to dismiss members of independent agencies, which could lead to broader enforcement powers and significant consequences.
Last week, the Court directed a review of the 1935 case Humphrey’s Executor v. United States. Hans von Spakowsky, a legal fellow affiliated with the Conservative Heritage Foundation, commented that this precedent now seems to be on “life support.”
Von Spakowsky argues that agencies like the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission should not be exempt from presidential oversight. He stated, “The Constitution designates the president as the head of the executive branch. Like CEOs of major corporations, they should oversee the entire operation, including the enforcement arms. It doesn’t make sense to say Congress can limit this power.”
Supreme Court Allows Trump to Fire FTC Commissioner
This discussion comes in light of a recent ruling from the Supreme Court, which allowed Trump to dismiss a Biden-appointed FTC commissioner during his tenure.
In a decisive 6-3 vote, the Court ruled that the previous case surrounding Trump’s Secretary Rebecca Massacre could be leveraged to rethink the Humphrey’s decision, which historically prevented President Franklin D. Roosevelt from firing a commission member without justification.
The case has raised questions about the independence of such commissions. Joshua Blackman, a law professor, suggested that if the Court revises Humphrey’s precedent, it could also affect other agencies that currently have legal protections against dismissal.
“This ruling could extend beyond just the FTC,” Blackman noted. “The real issue is whether the Federal Reserve will be seen as different.”
Trump’s Administration Pushes for Expanded Presidential Power
The Court has indicated that it views the Federal Reserve as a uniquely structured entity, which was reflected in its earlier decisions this year regarding Labor Commission dismissals. There’s also an ongoing case involving Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook which might test the Court’s stance further.
Von Spakovsky remarked that the Supreme Court is aiming to revise the Humphrey’s framework. He referenced the decision that curtailed independence under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and pointed to a previous ruling that allowed the president to freely fire the director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Chief Justice John Roberts has highlighted that the president’s power resonates from Article 2 of the Constitution, especially regarding enforceable actions taken on their behalf. The CFPB’s structure, which comprises a single director, was noted for deviating from presidential oversight.
Impact of Supreme Court Rulings on Future Governance
Proponents of Trump’s administration see these decisions as pathways to achieving a unified executive, where the president retains singular control over the executive branch.
In this landscape, Trump appears ready to challenge the Supreme Court on the Massacre case to possibly circumvent various regulations and limit the authority of appointees from independent agencies.
Jed Shugerman, a law professor, expressed that Trump’s efforts have advanced the unified executive concept farther than many legal authorities could have anticipated. However, he critiques the president’s use of this authority, suggesting it exposes the theory as somewhat authoritarian.
John Shu, a constitutional law expert and former official in both Bush administrations, shared insights suggesting that the Supreme Court is likely to limit Humphrey’s implications given the FTC’s broadened role since 1935.
Shu argued, “The FTC today is not the same as it was in 1935. It’s empowered to conduct investigations, issue subpoenas, file lawsuits, and enforce financial penalties. Its functions have expanded significantly.”
