Supreme Court Temporarily Backs Trump’s Power to Remove FTC Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter

Supreme Court Temporarily Backs Trump’s Power to Remove FTC Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter

Supreme Court Temporarily Backs Trump’s Power to Remove FTC Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter

Supreme Court Temporarily Backs Trump's Power to Remove FTC Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter
Image from CBS News

Chief Justice John Roberts has issued an interim order, temporarily allowing President Donald Trump to remove Federal Trade Commission (FTC) member Rebecca Kelly Slaughter. This decision grants the Trump administration relief while the Supreme Court takes additional time to review its request to overturn a lower court ruling that mandated Slaughter’s reinstatement.

Slaughter’s removal in March 2025 by the White House Office of Presidential Personnel, despite her reappointment by former President Joe Biden and a term set to expire in 2029, sparked a significant legal challenge. She argued that her dismissal violated the Federal Trade Commission Act, which restricts a president’s ability to remove commissioners to specific grounds such as inefficiency or malfeasance.

In July, a federal district court in Washington, D.C., sided with Slaughter, declaring her removal “unlawful.” The Trump administration appealed this decision, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit declined last week to freeze the district court’s order. This prompted the administration to seek emergency intervention from the Supreme Court.

The ongoing dispute highlights a critical debate over presidential authority concerning independent agencies. While a landmark 1935 Supreme Court case, Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, upheld Congress’s power to enact “for-cause” removal protections for such commissions, the high court has recently shown a tendency to reassert the president’s power to remove executive officers without cause. The Trump administration contends that the modern FTC wields “vast executive authority,” distinguishing it from its 1935 predecessor. The Supreme Court’s eventual full decision in this case is anticipated to have significant implications for the balance of power between the presidency and independent regulatory bodies.

阅读中文版 (Read Chinese Version)

Disclaimer: This content is aggregated from public sources online. Please verify information independently. If you believe your rights have been infringed, contact us for removal.