HomeEverythingEducationTV
Equities & FundsCrypto & Digital AssetsAI & TechnologyBusiness & CorporateUS Politics & PolicyGeopolitics & Global RiskMacro, Rates & FXCommodities & EnergyEuropean Politics & MarketsAsia-PacificReal Estate & Property
Story archiveAll categories
← All Stories

Supreme Court ruling allows Trump to fire officials from independent agencies

Created at 14 Jul · 11:06 AM1 source↑ Market-relevant
IN SHORT

Federal officials fired by the Trump administration are calling the Supreme Court's decision in Trump v Slaughter a "dagger in the heart" of the civil service. The ruling increases the president's authority over independent federal agencies, potentially opening them to corruption and manipulation.

✉Newsletter

PiQ Daily

Pick your topics. Get only what matters, on your cadence.

Key Numbers

50+officials fired by Trump administration
1935year of landmark ruling limiting presidential power
6 to 3Supreme Court vote margin
91-year-oldage of precedent overturned

Who's Involved

Donald Trump
President who sought to overturn limits on firing independent agency officials
Rebecca Slaughter
FTC commissioner fired by Trump, who continued litigation challenging her termination
Alvaro Bedoya
FTC commissioner fired by Trump, who resigned due to lack of compensation
Cathy Harris
Former employee of the Merit Systems Protection Board impacted by the ruling
Deirdre Hamilton
National Mediation Board member fired by Trump, who filed a lawsuit
Supreme Court
Court that ruled to increase presidential authority over independent agencies

↳ Why This Matters

The Supreme Court's decision significantly alters the balance of power between the presidency and independent federal agencies, potentially impacting regulatory enforcement, government accountability, and the non-partisan nature of the civil service.

Key facts

  • The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to increase presidential authority over independent federal agencies.
  • The decision effectively allows the president to fire members of independent agencies.
  • Fired officials, including FTC commissioners Rebecca Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya, view the ruling as a threat to the civil service.
  • The ruling overturns an 80-year-old precedent that limited presidential power over such agencies.
  • Concerns exist that the decision will lead to politicization and corruption within federal agencies.

Federal officials who were dismissed by the Trump administration have characterized the recent Supreme Court decision as a severe blow to the civil service, warning that it could expose independent government agencies to corruption and presidential manipulation.

Since his January 2025 return to office, Donald Trump has reportedly fired over 50 officials from federal agencies. This action followed the administration's efforts to have the Supreme Court overturn a 1935 ruling, known as Humphrey's Executor, which had previously limited the president's power to remove individuals from independent agencies.

The Supreme Court's decision in the case, Trump v Slaughter, which involved the firing of Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Democratic commissioner Rebecca Slaughter, effectively grants the president broad authority to dismiss members of these independent bodies. Slaughter described receiving notification of her termination via email in March 2025 while attending her child's school play, an event that caused her significant distress.

Slaughter and fellow Democratic FTC commissioner Alvaro Bedoya, who was also fired, filed a lawsuit challenging their dismissals. Bedoya eventually resigned due to financial reasons, while Slaughter continued the legal battle, supported by her husband's income. A federal judge initially reinstated Slaughter in July 2025, but the administration appealed, and the Supreme Court allowed Trump to remove her pending the case's continuation. The court's decision to hear the case was seen by Slaughter as a negative omen for the precedent's survival.

On June 29, 2026, the Supreme Court, in a 6-3 vote, expanded the president's power over independent federal agencies. Slaughter expressed deep concern that this ruling undermines protections for all government workers, potentially leading to a highly politicized workforce. She fears a future where political donations influence policy decisions and agencies that promote economic fairness are compromised.

Slaughter also criticized proponents of the decision, arguing that businesses supporting broader deregulatory authority under Trump might face adverse consequences when a future Democratic administration wields similar expanded powers. She concluded that rules enforced by politically accountable officials removable by the president lose their efficacy.

Following this ruling, the court declined to review the case of Cathy Harris, who was dismissed from the Merit Systems Protection Board, an agency tasked with safeguarding merit-based hiring. Harris echoed Slaughter's concerns, stating the decision "seriously points a dagger at the heart of the civil service" and could deter individuals from entering federal service due to fears of politically motivated dismissals.

Harris believes the decision undermines the independence of the MSPB, potentially reverting the civil service to a patronage-based system susceptible to corruption. She cited a New York Times report suggesting the Trump administration had influenced the MSPB on a constitutional argument concerning presidential power, which she sees as indicative of how the Slaughter decision will enable White House interference in agency operations.

Other federal officials remain in legal uncertainty. Deirdre Hamilton, a member of the National Mediation Board, was fired by Trump in October 2025 despite her term having expired. Hamilton argues her dismissal failed to comply with the statute, which requires board members to serve until a replacement is qualified, emphasizing the importance of a full board for stability and dispute mediation.

Frequently asked questions

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to increase the president's authority over independent federal agencies, effectively allowing the president to fire members of these agencies.

The Humphrey's Executor ruling, established in 1935, had limited the president's power to remove officials from independent agencies.

Fired officials worry the decision will lead to increased politicization, corruption, and manipulation of independent agencies, undermining the civil service.

Affected officials include FTC commissioners Rebecca Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya, Merit Systems Protection Board employee Cathy Harris, and National Mediation Board member Deirdre Hamilton.

What Happens Next

01Congress may take action to shore up civil service protections.
02Hamilton and her attorney are awaiting an opportunity to respond to the Trump v Slaughter decision in her case.

Get the newsletter.

Pick the topics you actually care about. We'll email when there's news worth your time, on the cadence you choose. Cancel any time from your account.

Cadence

How It Developed

Donald Trump took office again in January 2025.
Trump administration sought to overturn a 1935 ruling limiting presidential power over independent agencies.
Rebecca Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya, FTC commissioners, were fired in March 2025.
Slaughter and Bedoya filed a lawsuit challenging their terminations.
A federal judge reinstated Slaughter in July 2025, but the Trump administration appealed.
The Supreme Court allowed Trump to remove Slaughter in September 2025 as the case continued.
The Supreme Court ruled 6 to 3 on June 29, 2026, to increase presidential authority over independent agencies.
The court denied a review of Cathy Harris's case after her firing from the Merit Systems Protection Board.

Sources

T1
Victims of Trump purge call supreme court ruling a ‘dagger in heart’ to civil serviceThe Guardian

Related Stories

Trump officials accused of stacking chemical safety board with industry allies
13 Jul · 12:11 PM
Ex-top civil servant Olly Robbins sues PM Starmer over sacking
13 Jul · 2:46 PM
Supreme Court Justices Testify Before Congress Seeking Security Funds
14 Jul · 10:11 AM
US refunds $81bn in tariffs after Supreme Court ruling
14 Jul · 12:46 AM
Trump's corporate endorsements draw ethics concerns
13 Jul · 7:46 PM