Independent agencies' members can temporarily be terminated by Trump, rules Supreme Court.
President Trump secures the authority to dismiss two independent agency members in a 6-3 Supreme Court ruling, for the time being.
NPR's Andrea Hsu explains the decision, which provides insight into the Supreme Court's perception of President Trump's power. The ruling does not signify the final verdict on the matter, but it indicates the court's inclination towards Trump's power scope.
The contested officials in question are Gwynne Wilcox of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and Cathy Harris of the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). They both sued after being dismissed by Trump, claiming his actions contravened the law and Supreme Court precedent. The Trump administration asserted that restricting the president's power to remove members of independent agencies proceeds against the Constitution.
The dispute has led to a succession of legal struggles in the lower courts. Initially, two judges deemed Wilcox and Harris' dismissals a violation of the law and Supreme Court precedent. The Supreme Court upheld a unanimous verdict in an earlier case, Humphrey's Executor (1935), stating that Congress could limit a president's power to remove members of independent agencies, and these officials went back to work for a period. However, the government appealed, resulting in further courtroom ping pong.
Last month, Chief Justice John Roberts intervened and authorized Trump to reinstate Wilcox and Harris. Yesterday, the entire Supreme Court has issued a ruling on the matter.
A majority of justices decided that Trump has the authority to fleetingly dismiss Wilcox and Harris. They argued that the Constitution grants the president the prerogative to remove officials who contribute to his duties, with limited exceptions. The court also found that Wilcox and Harris were likely not eligible for those exceptions.
Nevertheless, it is essential to recognize that the Supreme Court has not yet heard arguments in this case. This decision was made through the emergency docket, which holds significance for speedy determinations. This judicial avenue has become more popular, particularly among conservatives to expedite decisions without hearing from both sides.
Justice Elena Kagan expressed reservations regarding this procedure in her dissent. She asserted that the use of the emergency docket to alter or overturn existing law compromises its purpose. Kagan stated that the stakes include more than just a single official's employment status. The integrity of the very concept of independent agencies resting on the same foundation as other independent agencies is also at risk. The conservative majority acknowledged the Federal Reserve as a unique entity with provisions not affected by the order, to allay concerns about removing the Fed Chair Jerome Powell, similarly threatened by Trump.
Although yesterday's decision is not final, it provides a glimpse into the court's perspectives on this case and offers indications of potential future rulings.
The government's ongoing dispute with Gwynne Wilcox of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and Cathy Harris of the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) over their dismissals by President Trump takes a significant turn with the Supreme Court's recent ruling. A majority of justices have decided that the president has the authority to temporarily dismiss Wilcox and Harris, signifying the court's inclination towards upholding presidential power within policy-and-legislation and politics, particularly in regards to government appointments and independent agencies. However, Justice Elena Kagan has expressed reservations about the procedure used in this case, arguing that it compromises the purpose of the emergency docket and potentially jeopardizes the integrity of independent agencies.
