The US Supreme Court ruled on Monday that President Donald Trump can fire leaders of independent agencies or commissions, ending a 90-year-old precedent that limited executive power. The 6-3 decision in Trump v. Slaughter drew dissents from Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Elena Kagan.
Case Background
The case centered on the White House's March 2025 firing of Federal Trade Commission (FTC) member Rebecca Slaughter. Trump dismissed Slaughter via email, stating that her continued service as a commissioner would be “inconsistent with [the] administration’s priorities.” Slaughter subsequently sued the Trump administration, arguing she was terminated without cause, and a lower court ordered her reinstatement.
In challenging Slaughter's suit, the White House urged the court to overturn Humphrey's Executor v. United States, a landmark 1935 ruling that limited presidential power over independent agencies by affirming that the president unlawfully fired an FTC member.
Dissent and Implications
Justice Sotomayor wrote in her dissent, joined by Kagan and Jackson: “Today, this Court undoes centuries of political practice and concludes that all three branches of Government have been acting in open defiance of the Constitution all this time. Its conclusion is wrong.” She added that the Constitution, history, and precedent allow Congress to limit removal causes for commission heads, and that the ruling grants the president “a power unknown even to the English Crown against which the Founders revolted.”
The FTC enforces consumer protection and antitrust laws, with five bipartisan commissioners—no more than three from the same party. Congress imposed hiring and firing restrictions to insulate the agency from partisan politics. The Trump administration sought a stay from the court of appeals but was denied; two appeals judges wrote that the government was unlikely to succeed because any ruling would “defy binding, on-point, and repeatedly preserved supreme court precedent.”
Supreme Court Stay and Reactions
The administration then petitioned the Supreme Court for a stay, which was granted in September 2025 with three justices dissenting. Former government officials warned that overruling Humphrey's Executor would undermine agency independence. Lauren McFerran, former National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) chair, and Celine McNicholas, a former NLRB official, wrote in an October 2025 Economic Policy Institute report: “Eliminating these removal protections would jeopardize all facets of agency independence, as agency leaders would be reluctant to engage in regulatory or enforcement actions – or even day-to-day agency decision-making – without coordinating with the White House for fear of termination.”
President Trump celebrated the decision on Truth Social, posting: “This Decision was long sought by United States Presidents, dating all the way back to the 1930s. It is such an Honor to be the sitting President who won this Historic and Unprecedented Ruling, one of the most important ever given with respect to Presidential Powers.”
