The Supreme Court is about to make some big decisions that could change how much control the president has over important government agencies like the Federal Reserve and the Federal Trade Commission. These cases could shake up how Washington works in ways most Americans have never seen before.
President Trump fired two powerful agency leaders in 2025. In March, he removed FTC Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter. Then in August, he fired Federal Reserve Board Governor Lisa Cook over mortgage fraud claims. Both officials fought back in court, saying the president cannot fire them without good reason.
For nearly 90 years, a Supreme Court case called Humphrey’s Executor has protected agency heads from being fired without cause. This rule was created to keep agencies independent from political pressure. Think of it like having referees in a sports game who cannot be replaced just because one team dislikes their calls.
The Supreme Court will hear arguments in Trump v. Slaughter about the FTC firing. Another case, Cook v. Trump, is scheduled for January 2026. These cases ask whether Congress can limit the president’s power to fire agency leaders. A district court already ruled that Trump lacked authority to fire Cook without proper cause. The Court granted certiorari before judgment in the Slaughter case, allowing direct review of the district court decision and bypassing the usual appeals process.
The Federal Reserve faces special challenges. Trump issued an executive order putting Fed regulatory functions under White House oversight, though monetary policy remains untouched. Former Fed official Daniel Tarullo warns this creates an unworkable split that threatens the Fed’s independence. Courts would face significant difficulty determining whether dismissals stem from regulatory disagreements or monetary policy positions.
If the Supreme Court overturns these protections, agencies like the Fed, SEC, FTC, and NLRB could fall under direct presidential control. This would mean dramatic policy swings every time a new president takes office. Enforcement priorities would shift with political winds rather than staying consistent. Proper risk management becomes crucial when regulatory agencies face potential policy volatility that could impact market stability.
The stakes are enormous. These agencies oversee everything from interest rates to consumer protection to worker rights. Making them more political could mean less stability for businesses and families who depend on predictable rules.
The Supreme Court’s decisions will determine whether agencies remain independent watchdogs or become extensions of whoever sits in the White House.
