US Supreme Court overturns 91-year-old Humphrey's Executor precedent, letting Trump fire independent agency heads
A 6-3 majority in Trump v. Slaughter declared that for-cause removal protections at multimember independent agencies are unconstitutional, ending the 1935 shield that kept the FTC, NLRB and roughly two dozen other commissions beyond the US president's reach
Add to a list
No lists yet.
developments
-
Ruling confirmed to extend at-will presidential removal to the SEC, CFTC, EEOC, and CPSC; a companion Supreme Court order simultaneously validated Trump's earlier CPSC firings of Boyle, Hoehn-Saric, and Trumka Jr. Yahoo Finance and tftc.io flagged immediate crypto-market implications. No new agency commissioner firings reported in the 24 hours following the ruling. ↗
-
Companion 5-4 ruling in Trump v. Cook (Roberts writing, joined by Kavanaugh and three liberals) blocked Trump from firing Fed Governor Lisa Cook, preserving the Federal Reserve carve-out; Trump called the Slaughter ruling a 'BIG WIN'; Kagan dissent said court repealed Humphrey's Executor 'by fiat.' ↗
Summary
The US Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in Trump v. Slaughter on June 29 that the US president may remove members of independent federal agencies without cause, formally overturning the 1935 Humphrey's Executor v. United States precedent that had shielded multimember commissions from White House control. The case arose from Trump's March 2025 firing of FTC Commissioners Rebecca Kelly Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya. Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the conservative majority, held that the Constitution's vesting clause gives the president plenary removal authority over executive officers. The same day, in a companion 5-4 ruling in Trump v. Cook, Roberts joined the three liberals and Brett Kavanaugh to block Trump's August 2025 firing of Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, the first Black woman on the Fed board, citing a "tradition of central banking protected from political interference." Trump celebrated on Truth Social, calling the Slaughter ruling a "BIG WIN." Justice Kagan, dissenting in Slaughter, said the court had repealed Humphrey's Executor "by fiat."
The split
The paired rulings create a two-tier system: independent regulatory agencies (FTC, NLRB, MSPB, EEOC, CPSC, NTSB, around two dozen in total) now operate at the president's pleasure; the Federal Reserve retains statutory insulation for now, though the Cook ruling is a preliminary injunction decision, not the final word on the merits. Legal commentators noted Roberts engineered the split to protect dollar credibility while giving Trump maximum domestic executive power.
By the numbers
- 6-3, majority in Trump v. Slaughter (five conservative justices plus Roberts; Kagan, Sotomayor, Jackson dissenting)
- 5-4, majority in Trump v. Cook (Roberts and Kavanaugh joining the three liberals)
- ~24, independent agencies whose for-cause removal protections are now unenforceable
- 91, years Humphrey's Executor was good law before today's ruling
Why it matters
Roughly two dozen agencies, including the NLRB, MSPB, EEOC, CPSC and NTSB, now operate at the president's pleasure. Their bipartisan-balance requirements become unenforceable. The Fed carve-out preserves the immediate safe harbour for global dollar markets, but the Cook ruling is still in litigation, leaving the question of Fed independence open. For trading partners, firms subject to US enforcement, and allies relying on independent US regulatory signals, the ruling cements a structural shift in executive power they must price into long-term arrangements.
What to watch
- Whether Trump immediately fires additional NLRB or MSPB members using the ruling as direct authority.
- The Cook merits case: whether lower courts sustain the Fed carve-out after full briefing.
- Congressional response: Democrats have signalled legislation to codify for-cause protections but lack the votes.