Supreme Court Supports Trump in FTC Removal Case

The Supreme Court recently granted a significant win for the administration, allowing President Trump to remove Democratic members from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). This situation challenges the traditional limitations on presidential control over independent regulatory agencies.

Chief Justice John Roberts issued a brief order preventing lower court decisions regarding a controversial case while other legal challenges are still ongoing. Although the order doesn’t answer the larger constitutional question of whether the president can dismiss an FTC commissioner without a specific cause, it hints that the judiciary might lean toward supporting the administration’s stance when it has final say on the merits of the case.

The issue first arose in March when Trump dismissed both the commissioner and Democratic Secretary Alvaro Bedoya. Following his dismissal, Bedoya opted out of the legal challenge but continued fighting the decision in federal court. Though the FTC’s website still lists him as part of the agency, his legal position remains uncertain as lawsuits move through the federal courts, which had previously ruled in his favor.

This matter brings to light a 1935 Supreme Court precedent — Humphrey’s Executor v. United States — which upheld restrictions placed by Congress on the president’s ability to remove officials. According to the FTC Act of 1914, a commissioner can only be removed for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or misconduct,” not merely due to differing political views.

In recent times, the Supreme Court has shown skepticism towards protections for independent institutions. Numerous legal challenges have highlighted the judiciary’s rollback of restrictions related to presidential removal powers. Similar limitations affecting the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board have also been deemed to infringe on the president’s authority over administrative agencies.

This year, in Trump v. Wilcox, the Supreme Court upheld lower court rulings that prevented Trump from dismissing officials from other regulatory bodies, indicating that such agencies wield significant enforcement power, potentially exposing them to constitutional debates.

Legal experts assert that the restrictions on FTC removal could unconstitutionally limit the president’s powers under Article II and control over administrative organizations. The Trump administration seems to be increasing its efforts to replace more independent committee members, indicating a willingness to push these boundaries further.

The FTC is designed to operate under a bipartisan framework, shielding it from political influence. It typically has five commissioners serving staggered seven-year terms, with no more than three members from the same political party. Trump appointed Bedoya in 2018, and President Biden reappointed him in 2024, both figures representing the Democrats until the recent removal.

The ultimate ruling on these essential constitutional questions could reshape the ongoing dynamics between the White House and federal agencies, which have generally maintained a degree of independence from political forces.

Furthermore, this decision might have wider implications for Trump’s ability to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook. However, recent decisions suggest the Federal Reserve could be viewed differently, as it’s a “uniquely structured, semi-private entity” with historical ties to the First and Second Banks of the United States.