The Supreme Court has again undermined the power of Congress, ruling in Trump v Slaughter that the president can fire heads of independent agencies at will, overturning a 91-year-old precedent. The decision nullifies the Federal Trade Commission Act, a 112-year-old law, and reapportions power away from Congress to the president.
Ruling details and exception
The ruling allows Donald Trump to fire agency heads without cause and replace them with political loyalists, disregarding laws passed by Congress that protected those leaders from arbitrary termination. However, the decision includes a key exception: the president cannot fire members of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors without cause and proper procedure. This exception protects the independence of the Federal Reserve and financial markets.
In a separate decision, the court ruled in favor of Lisa Cook, a Joe Biden appointee and the first Black woman on the Federal Reserve Board, who was fired via social media by Trump last year.
Impact on administrative state
The Slaughter decision marks another expansion of presidential power and a blow to Congress's prerogatives, continuing the court's attacks on the "administrative state"—the network of independent agencies and commissions staffed by experts and civil servants. The ruling is seen as fostering incompetence in the federal government and concentrating power in the hands of Trump and the court's Republican appointees.
Moira Donegan, a Guardian US columnist, wrote: "The Slaughter decision marks yet another expansion of the president’s power, yet another blow to Congress’ prerogatives, and yet another in a long line of attacks on the court’s favorite bete noir."
Constitutional stakes
The case originated from Trump's 2025 termination of Rebecca Slaughter, a Federal Trade Commission member, without cause. The FTC, like other independent agencies, was created by Congress, which also passed laws protecting its leaders from political firing. The Supreme Court ruled that any agency with "executive" powers must be under the executive's control, disregarding Congress's authority.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority that the Constitution's separation of powers requires all bodies exercising executive powers to be controlled by the chief executive. In dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by the two other liberals, said the court was "transforming [the president's] duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed into a license to act in defiance of those very laws."
Consequences for government
The ruling sacrifices government effectiveness and the integrity of federal agencies. Bureaucracy jobs may now be dispensed as favors and purged with each new administration, replacing expertise with political loyalty. Trump called the ruling a "BIG WIN" on Truth Social, but Donegan concluded: "For him, maybe. Not for us."
