The Power Shift: Trump's Move to Control Independent Agencies

In a recent development, the D. C. Circuit Court of Appeals made a significant decision. The court ruled that President Trump has the authority to dismiss members of independent agencies. This ruling came from a 2-1 decision, stating that limits on the president's power to remove executive branch officers are unconstitutional. This is a big deal because it affects how independent agencies operate. These agencies, like the National Labor Relations Board and the Merit Systems Protection Board, handle workplace complaints and have traditionally worked independently from the White House. The court's decision involves two specific cases. Trump fired Gwynne Wilcox from the National Labor Relations Board in January and Cathy Harris from the Merit Systems Protection Board in February. Both agencies are designed to operate independently, with members from different political parties serving staggered terms. This setup is meant to keep them separate from the White House's influence. Members of these agencies are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate, but they can only be fired for serious reasons, like neglect of duty. The court's ruling challenges a long-standing precedent. In 1935, the Supreme Court decided in Humphrey's Executor that presidents can't fire independent agency members without cause. This decision has been a cornerstone of independent agency operations for nearly a century. However, the current Supreme Court has been gradually weakening this precedent, especially for agencies led by a single person. Lower courts had previously ruled that the 1935 decision still applied to Wilcox and Harris, but the appeals court overruled them.Since taking office, Trump has been working to bring independent agencies under his control. He issued an executive order requiring these agencies to coordinate with the White House. Trump has already fired more than 10 Democratic members of independent agencies. The White House argues that the president should have the power to hire and fire executive officials as needed, citing the Constitution's Article II, which gives the president executive power. The court's decision has raised concerns about the future of other independent agencies, including the Federal Reserve. If the 1935 precedent is overturned, Trump could potentially fire members of these agencies as well. A group of law professors has expressed worries about this possibility, noting that the Federal Reserve's stability is crucial for the American economy. They argue that uncertainty about the Federal Reserve's operations could lead to financial and political instability. The appeals court's decision is likely to face further legal challenges. The Supreme Court may eventually weigh in on the matter, given the significance of the issues at stake. This ruling highlights the ongoing debate about the balance of power between the president and independent agencies. It also raises questions about the future of these agencies and their role in American governance.