The E. Barrett Prettyman U.S. Courthouse is shown in Washington, D.C.
Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images North America
hide caption
toggle caption
Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images North America
In a victory for the White House, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has authorized President Trump to dismiss two Democratic members from independent agencies. In a split decision of 2-1, the court ruled that limitations on the president’s authority to remove officers from the executive branch are unconstitutional.
This ruling carries significant weight, as multiple legal disputes concerning Trump’s dismissals are likely to reach the Supreme Court. While a similar panel of judges previously allowed Trump’s termination of U.S. Special Counsel Hampton Dellinger, this current ruling is the first involving dismissals at agencies with collective boards since Trump assumed office.
The case revolves around National Labor Relations Board Member Gwynne Wilcox, who was dismissed by Trump in January, and Merit Systems Protection Board Member Cathy Harris, fired in February. Both agencies adjudicate workplace grievances.
Historically, these agencies and numerous others have operated with a level of independence granted by Congress. Their framework, which includes Democratic and Republican members serving staggered terms, has fostered a separation from the influence of the White House.
Members are appointed by presidents and require Senate confirmation. However, in establishing these agencies, Congress stipulated that presidents may only remove members for just cause, such as failure to perform duties or wrongdoing.
In 1935, the Supreme Court affirmed these constraints on presidential authority in the case of Humphrey’s Executor, relating to the Federal Trade Commission. Now, the prospects for this 90-year-old ruling are in jeopardy.
The current conservative supermajority on the Court has already begun to erode this precedent, asserting that these limitations do not extend to agencies run by a single director.
District judges determined that this principle applied in the instances of Wilcox and Harris, earning them reinstatement.
These determinations prompted the government to seek stays from the D.C. Circuit Court in both cases, with arguments presented last week.
Since assuming the presidency, Trump has rapidly sought to assert control over independent agencies, issuing an executive order requiring them to “consistently communicate and align policies and priorities” with the White House.
Trump has dismissed over ten Democratic members from independent agencies, including the two Democrats on the Federal Trade Commission, who recently initiated a lawsuit in federal court.
The White House contends that since the Constitution makes the president responsible for the executive branch’s conduct, he must retain the authority to hire and fire as needed.
D.C. Circuit Judge Justin Walker concurred, stating in his opinion that Article II of the Constitution confers “complete” executive power upon the president, citing a recent Supreme Court ruling. This includes the prerogative to dismiss executive officials, he asserted.
There are already apprehensions that negating Humphrey’s Executor would enable Trump to terminate members of various independent agencies, including the Federal Reserve.
A coalition of legal scholars submitted an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in a related case, expressing these concerns.
“The effective operation of the Federal Reserve is crucial for the stability of the U.S. economy,” the scholars stated. “Fears (justified or not) that its function could be impaired could lead to financial and political instability, causing long-term damage.”
