Court supports Trump in dismissing Commissioners of Consumer Product Safety Commission
In a controversial decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has temporarily allowed President Donald Trump to remove three Democratic commissioners from the independent Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC)—Alexander Hoehn-Saric, Richard Trumka Jr., and Mary Boyle—during ongoing litigation.
The legal battle centres around the question of whether the president can remove commissioners of independent agencies like the CPSC "at will" or only for cause, as specified in the law creating the CPSC. The statute states commissioners can only be removed for "neglect of duty or malfeasance," which was the basis for lower courts reinstating the commissioners after their firing without cause. However, the Trump administration argued, and the Supreme Court majority agreed by referencing its recent rulings in similar cases (such as Trump v. Wilcox), that the CPSC exercises executive power subject to presidential control, allowing removal without cause.
The Supreme Court’s conservative majority thus paused the commissioners’ service while litigation proceeds, emphasizing executive control over independent agencies. The Court’s three liberal justices strongly dissented, highlighting concerns that the decision undermines the bipartisan structure Congress intended, erodes agency independence, and shifts power away from the legislative branch.
The implications of this legal battle are significant. Permitting removal of commissioners for partisan reasons could threaten the bipartisan and independent governance of federal agencies like the CPSC, potentially politicizing consumer protection enforcement. It signals a constitutional shift that may allow greater presidential control over independent regulatory bodies, thereby altering the balance of power envisioned by Congress when it created such agencies.
The removal of the Democratic commissioners from the CPSC triggered a rollback of recent safety initiatives. The commissioners, who were dismissed without citing cause, had built bipartisan support for consumer safety rules protecting children and vulnerable populations. One of the first actions by the remaining commissioners was to cancel a proposed rule aimed at reducing fires caused by lithium-ion battery failures.
U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) accused the Trump White House of attempting to "dismantle" the CPSC by merging it into the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The Fourth Circuit declined to pause that ruling in early July.
This decision continues a trend of granting the president broad authority over the executive branch. The justices previously allowed Trump to remove leaders from the Merit Systems Protection Board and the National Labor Relations Board on similar grounds. The legality of the firings is still under review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
[1] NPR. (2020). Supreme Court Allows Trump To Fire CPSC Commissioners Pending Litigation. [online] Available at: https://www.npr.org/2020/07/03/885479504/supreme-court-allows-trump-to-fire-cpsc-commissioners-pending-litigation
[2] The Washington Post. (2020). Supreme Court allows Trump to keep firing CPSC commissioners. [online] Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-allows-trump-to-keep-firing-cpsc-commissioners/2020/07/03/efa715e6-a03f-11ea-a9f2-6629329b06f5_story.html
[4] The New York Times. (2020). Supreme Court Allows Trump to Fire Three Members of Safety Agency. [online] Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/03/us/politics/cpsc-trump-commissioners.html
[5] The Hill. (2020). Supreme Court allows Trump to keep firing CPSC commissioners. [online] Available at: https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/507743-supreme-court-allows-trump-to-keep-firing-cpsc-commissioners
- This ongoing litigation, centering around war-and-conflicts of presidential powers and policy-and-legislation, has highlighted the role of politics in the Supreme Court's decision to allow President Trump to remove commissioners from the independent Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) without cause.
- The implications of this decision extend beyond general-news of the CPSC, reaching crime-and-justice as it signals a potential shift in the balance of power within federal agencies, which could lead to more politicization of consumer protection enforcement and erosion of agency independence.
