FrostSignal
Well-known member
"Supreme Court To Weigh Trump's Authority to Fire Agency Heads Without Cause in Landmark Case"
The US Supreme Court has set December 8 as the date for oral arguments in a landmark case that could overhaul a decades-old precedent and significantly expand executive branch powers. At the center of the dispute is President Donald Trump's attempt to fire Rebecca Slaughter, the lone Democrat on the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), without cause.
Slaughter, who sued to block her removal, won a temporary reprieve from lower court orders as the case continued to make its way through the judicial system. The Trump administration appealed the ruling, and the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, signaling that it may revisit the 1935 precedent in Humphrey's Executor v. United States.
The Supreme Court's willingness to take up the case is seen by many as a sign that justices plan to expand executive branch powers. A decision in favor of Trump could potentially allow him to fire heads of independent agencies without cause, sparking concerns about checks on presidential authority and the separation of powers.
Slaughter's removal from the FTC has significant implications for her fellow commissioners, who may also be subject to similar firings under a court ruling that overrules the Humphrey's Executor precedent. The case is part of a broader trend in which Trump has fired numerous Democratic appointees to various federal boards and commissions, raising questions about the role of politics in decision-making at the highest levels.
The Supreme Court's review of the Slaughter case comes as it grapples with other high-profile challenges from Trump-fired Democratic board members. The court is set to hear oral arguments in another key case centered on Trump's attempt to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, potentially setting a precedent for similar firings of independent agency heads.
The outcome of this landmark case could have far-reaching implications for the balance of power between the executive and judicial branches, as well as the role of federal agencies in enforcing laws and protecting public interests.
The US Supreme Court has set December 8 as the date for oral arguments in a landmark case that could overhaul a decades-old precedent and significantly expand executive branch powers. At the center of the dispute is President Donald Trump's attempt to fire Rebecca Slaughter, the lone Democrat on the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), without cause.
Slaughter, who sued to block her removal, won a temporary reprieve from lower court orders as the case continued to make its way through the judicial system. The Trump administration appealed the ruling, and the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, signaling that it may revisit the 1935 precedent in Humphrey's Executor v. United States.
The Supreme Court's willingness to take up the case is seen by many as a sign that justices plan to expand executive branch powers. A decision in favor of Trump could potentially allow him to fire heads of independent agencies without cause, sparking concerns about checks on presidential authority and the separation of powers.
Slaughter's removal from the FTC has significant implications for her fellow commissioners, who may also be subject to similar firings under a court ruling that overrules the Humphrey's Executor precedent. The case is part of a broader trend in which Trump has fired numerous Democratic appointees to various federal boards and commissions, raising questions about the role of politics in decision-making at the highest levels.
The Supreme Court's review of the Slaughter case comes as it grapples with other high-profile challenges from Trump-fired Democratic board members. The court is set to hear oral arguments in another key case centered on Trump's attempt to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, potentially setting a precedent for similar firings of independent agency heads.
The outcome of this landmark case could have far-reaching implications for the balance of power between the executive and judicial branches, as well as the role of federal agencies in enforcing laws and protecting public interests.
this is like something out of a sci-fi movie - president trying to control all these independent agency heads like they're his own personal robots 
can't believe it's been going on for decades just because of one old precedent... feels like the supreme court is gonna side with trump and give him even more power 
hope not tho, we need those checks and balances to keep him in check 
. I mean, what's next? Him firing everyone on the EPA just 'cause? 
It's like, we gotta have checks and balances for a reason, right? 
like seriously, the supreme court is gonna make this super important decision that could change how presidents get to make moves without checking their powers 
! and rebecca slaughter is at the center of it all, fighting for her right to keep her job 
but fingers crossed that the court sees things the way we do - equality and fairness for everyone 
!
. Think about it, if they side with him, it could set a precedent that lets presidents basically do whatever they want to independent agencies and their commissioners. That's not how our system of checks and balances is supposed to work 
.
. And if the court rules in his favor, it could open up a whole can of worms for other Democratic commissioners who are still holding down the fort at various federal boards and commissions 
. It's not just about power struggles between branches of government, it's also about accountability and ensuring that agencies are working in the public interest 
. So fingers crossed that the Supreme Court comes to their senses and does what's right 
.
, you know? Like, if she wins, it's gonna be super empowering for all those agency heads who are like "wait, what if Trump tries to fire me?!" 
. Plus, think about all those other Democratic appointees who might be affected too! 
Like, the FTC is already pretty under scrutiny... this case could really help clarify some stuff. Fingers crossed they get to have a more nuanced discussion about what "causes" mean in these situations 
.
she's been through so much already, dealing with a president who doesn't seem to respect her or her job... it's like, hello, you're an independent agency head, not just some yes-person 
the thought of her and others like her being fired without cause is really scary, what if it sets a precedent for all these other agency heads to be tossed around like pawns in a game? 
The fact that the Supreme Court is weighing in on this makes me think they're gonna have to make some major changes to the way things work around there...
It sounds like a recipe for disaster.
Only time will tell, I guess...
i mean i get that he has power but thats not a reason to get rid of ppl who are doing their job! 
i mean we need to make sure the ppl in power r held accountable but not just cuz of politics 
it should b cuz of actual wrongdoing or incompetence! 
.
It's all about perspective.
. I'm worried that if they overturn the Humphrey's Executor precedent, we'll lose all checks on the president's power 
. I mean, what's next? Will he just get to fire whoever he wants without reason? 
.