As a reality TV show host, Donald Trump rose to fame with the catchphrase: “You’re fired!”. On Monday, the US supreme court handed him – and all future presidents – the power to fire leaders of independent agencies or commissions, overturning 90 years of court precedent curbing executive power.
While Trump celebrated the decision on Truth Social as a “big win”, labor advocates, unions, and consumer advocacy groups criticized the supreme court decision on the case, Trump v Slaughter, and warned of the long-term impacts for democracy in the US. Rebecca Slaughter, the Federal Trade Commissioner fired last March, said she was “profoundly disappointed about today’s decision” during a press call.
“There’s no sugar-coating Slaughter. It’s an enormously important ruling (far more important than the other three decisions handed down today). It’s a huge win for Trump/the executive. And it’s going to have massive ramifications for the functioning of the government long after Trump is gone,” wrote Stephen Vladeck, a Georgetown Law professor.
Trump has already fired several leaders of independent agencies during his second presidential term. He fired National Labor Relations Board member Gwynne Wilcox, the first Black woman to serve on the agency’s board; Susan Tsui Grundmann, one of three board members at the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA); Erika McEntarfer, the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics; and Deirdre Hamilton, a member of the National Mediation Board.
But it was his firing of Slaughter that led to the supreme court ruling. Slaughter said in a statement that she was fired “because I have a voice. And he [Trump] is afraid of what I’ll tell the American people.”
Trump also fired another Democratic commissioner at the Federal Trade Commission, Alvaro Bedoya.
No cause was given for justifying the firings, other than noting their “continued service on the FTC is inconsistent with [the Trump] administration’s priorities”.
The ruling overturns Humphrey’s Executor, a 1935 ruling that the US constitution did not grant “illimitable power of removal” to the president and protected independent agency staff from potential political attacks from the president. That case was triggered by Franklin Roosevelt’s attempt to fire William Humphrey, a Republican commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission.
“As Justice Sotomayor recognized in dissent, today’s decision abandons nearly a century of settled constitutional understanding and replaces it with a loyalty test,” said Gary DiBianco, co-founder of the pro bono litigation corps Lawyers for Good Government.
The decision will leave Trump and any future president in far greater control of independent agencies.
“In short, our authoritarian president was just handed the keys to be even more authoritarian, and the long-term consequences will no doubt be disastrous,” said Rachel Rossi, the president of Alliance for Justice, a progressive judicial advocacy group, in a statement on the ruling.
“Under this ruling, the guardrails against corruption and unfair interference by President Trump are further eroded, putting millions of Americans at risk,” said Michael Sozan, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. “This ruling, which overturns nearly a century of well-settled law, allows the president to exert undue political pressure over government agencies that Congress designed to be insulated from such coercion.”
“The decision effectively prioritizes the political preferences of the president over ensuring that independent agencies can carry out their enforcement and regulatory functions consistent with the law and operate with integrity,” said Jocelyn Frye of the National Partnership for Women & Families.
In a separate ruling, the supreme court ruled against Trump’s firing of Federal Reserve board member Lisa Cook, which Trump attempted in August last year. But the supreme court has made clear that the Fed will be treated differently from other government agencies.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor called the Slaughter decision “egregiously wrong”, arguing that the majority had upended settled constitutional law in a ruling that, she wrote, “promises to unleash only chaos”.
“Today, the court discards that democratic regime in favor of one that distorts the structure of government to fit the majority’s theory of unitary, total executive control. The result is a president who emerges with far greater power than ever before,” she wrote.
Michael Sainato is labor reporter for Guardian US. Twitter @msainat1
