Supreme Court Supports Trump’s Authority to Dismiss FTC Commissioner
The Supreme Court has recently ruled in favor of former President Donald Trump, allowing him to fire a member of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) at will. This decision is part of a larger examination of presidential power concerning the removal of officials from independent agencies.
Chief Justice John Roberts issued an order stating that Rebecca Slaughter, the FTC commissioner appointed by President Biden, should be considered terminated for at least another week while her case is reviewed further by the Supreme Court. Slaughter has faced a tumultuous legal battle following Trump’s decision to dismiss her, which has sparked significant debate about the extent of executive power.
The legal disputes surrounding Slaughter’s termination have seen her reinstated and then dismissed again, highlighting the confusion over the rules governing such appointments. Following a ruling that temporarily allowed her to return to her position, she immediately engaged with the public through social media, presenting her judicial dissents.
Critics argue that Trump’s dismissal of Slaughter may violate the FTC Act, which typically restricts terminations to cases of serious misconduct. The situation draws attention to a precedent set nearly a century ago, known as Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, in which the Supreme Court ruled that President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s firing of an FTC commissioner was unlawful.
As the Supreme Court considers Slaughter’s case, it raises crucial questions about whether they might overturn or limit the implications of this historical ruling. Many observers believe the current conservative-leaning Court may be inclined to challenge the established norms regarding the independence of regulatory agencies.
Solicitor General John Sauer argued before the Court that the authority of the FTC has grown significantly since the time of the Humphrey’s Executor decision, emphasizing its expanded powers, including enforcing major laws like the Sherman Act.
This ongoing legal battle continues to illuminate the discussion around the balance of power in government and the accountability of appointed officials, reflecting a broader interest in the values of executive authority and agency independence.
