Supreme Court Upholds Trump’s Decision to Fire FTC Commissioner

The Supreme Court has upheld President Donald Trump’s decision to fire Rebecca Slaughter, the Biden-appointed Federal Trade Commission (FTC) commissioner. The 6-3 ruling, which aligned along ideological lines, kept S, the Biden-appointed Federal Trade Commission (FTC) commissioner. The 6-3 ruling, which aligned along ideological lines, kept Slaughter’s termination in place, signaling the court’s intent to reexamine the long-standing Supreme Court precedent established in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States. This 1935 case had previously deemed President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s firing of an FTC commissioner as unlawful, as it lacked cause. The decision, issued on Monday, sets the stage for a December hearing where the court will address the broader implications of presidential power over independent agencies.

The case has been a focal point of Trump’s broader effort to reduce the independence of federal agencies. Trump’s decision to fire Slaughter and another Democrat-appointed commissioner, Alvaro Bedoya, sparked legal challenges, as it appeared to contradict the FTC Act, which mandates that commissioners can only be fired for cause such as malfeasance. Trump justified the firings under his constitutional authority over the executive branch, a stance that has drawn criticism from legal experts.

Slaughter, who had been reinstated by a lower court, has been repeatedly removed and rehired as her case worked its way up the judicial system. The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the termination means she will remain sidelined from the FTC until after the December hearing. Legal analysts speculate that the current conservative-leaning court is interested in narrowing or reversing the Humphrey’s Executor ruling, which could significantly affect a president’s ability to remove members of independent agencies.

The three liberal justices dissented, with Justice Elena Kagan warning against the use of the emergency docket to allow actions that contradict existing precedent. Kagan’s dissent highlighted concerns about the court’s approach to reshaping the nation’s separation of powers. Fox News Digital attempted to reach out to Slaughter’s representative for comment, but no response was provided. The case remains a developing story with ongoing implications for executive authority and the structure of federal governance.