Dozens of independent commissions are now likely to become purely executive agencies
For nearly a century, the architecture of American governance rested on a quiet assumption: that certain experts, once appointed, could do their work without fear of political removal. On a Monday in late June 2026, the Supreme Court's conservative majority dismantled that assumption, overturning a 1935 precedent and ruling that presidents may dismiss independent agency officials at will. The decision, born from the firing of a single FTC commissioner, now reaches across dozens of regulatory bodies — and places a vast new instrument of power in the hands of the executive.
- A 6-3 Supreme Court majority has eliminated the 'for cause' removal protections that shielded independent agency officials for over ninety years, handing the presidency direct control over more than two dozen federal commissions.
- The ruling was triggered by the 2025 firing of FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter — removed without explanation after her reappointment by President Biden — whose lawsuit forced the court to confront a foundational constitutional question.
- Justice Sotomayor read her dissent aloud from the bench, a rare act of protest, warning that agencies overseeing labor, energy, nuclear safety, and trade are now effectively extensions of presidential will rather than independent deliberative bodies.
- President Trump declared the ruling the greatest expansion of presidential power in a century, having already begun removing officials from Democratic-appointed boards before the court formally cleared the path.
- The Federal Reserve and certain judicial bodies retain their protections for now, but the court left those questions explicitly unresolved — signaling that further consolidation of executive authority remains an open and active frontier.
On a Monday in late June, the Supreme Court handed the presidency a power it had been denied for nearly a century. In a 6-to-3 ruling, the conservative majority held that Congress cannot shield members of independent agencies from presidential removal without cause — overturning Humphrey's Executor v. United States, a 1935 precedent that had anchored the independence of federal regulatory bodies since the New Deal.
The case had a human origin. Rebecca Slaughter, an FTC commissioner reappointed by President Biden, was told in March 2025 that her continued service was inconsistent with the administration's priorities. She was removed without the cause federal law had long required. She sued, won reinstatement in district court, and the Supreme Court used her case to settle a far larger question.
Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the majority, argued that those who exercise executive power must ultimately answer to the president — and through him, to the people. The FTC, the court found, exercises executive functions and therefore cannot be insulated from presidential control. Restrictions on removal, the majority concluded, infringe on constitutional authority.
Justice Sotomayor dissented from the bench — a rare gesture of deep disagreement. Joined by Justices Kagan and Jackson, she warned that more than two dozen agencies, including the NLRB, FERC, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, would now transform from independent bodies into instruments of executive will. 'Today the majority reshapes our Government,' she wrote.
President Trump celebrated the decision as the greatest expansion of presidential power in a hundred years, having already tested its logic by removing officials from Democratic-appointed boards without stated cause. The court left the Federal Reserve and certain judicial bodies temporarily shielded, deferring those questions to another day. But for the broad landscape of American regulatory life — labor, energy, communications, trade — the constitutional insulation Congress once built around expertise and deliberation has been fundamentally altered.
On a Monday in late June, the Supreme Court handed the presidency a tool it had been denied for nearly a century. In a 6-to-3 decision, the conservative majority ruled that Congress cannot protect members of independent agencies from being fired by the president without cause. The ruling overturned Humphrey's Executor v. United States, a 1935 precedent born from the New Deal era, and fundamentally reshaped the balance between executive power and legislative restraint.
The case that triggered this shift had a human face. Rebecca Slaughter, an FTC commissioner appointed during Trump's first term and reappointed by President Biden, received word in March 2025 that her service was "inconsistent" with the administration's priorities. She was removed from her post without explanation, without the cause that federal law had required since 1914—inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office. Slaughter sued. A federal district court sided with her and ordered her reinstated. But the Supreme Court, which had been watching this case develop, saw an opportunity to settle a larger constitutional question.
Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, framed the issue in terms of presidential accountability. Those who exercise executive power on the president's behalf must answer to him, Roberts argued, and the president must answer to the people. "Although it is up to the Senate to decide whether to confirm those with whom the President would prefer to work, neither Congress nor the courts may saddle him with those with whom he cannot work," he wrote. The FTC, the court found, unquestionably exercises executive powers and therefore must remain under presidential control. Limits on removal, the majority concluded, infringe on constitutional authority.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented sharply, reading her opinion from the bench—a rare gesture signaling profound disagreement. Joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, she warned that the ruling would reshape American government. More than two dozen multi-member agencies now face transformation from independent bodies into extensions of executive will. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and the National Labor Relations Board all stand to lose the insulation Congress had built around them. "Put simply, today the majority reshapes our Government," Sotomayor wrote. "Dozens of independent commissions are now likely to become purely executive agencies, shifting tremendous power over broad swaths of American life into the President's hands."
President Trump celebrated the decision as the "Greatest Increase in Presidential Power in the last 100 years." The ruling came at a moment when he had already begun testing the boundaries of his authority, firing officials from Democratic-appointed boards and commissions without stated cause. The legal shield that had protected them for generations was now gone.
The court left some questions deliberately unanswered. The Federal Reserve, which the justices have long viewed as a "uniquely structured, quasi-private entity," retains its removal protections for now. Judges on the U.S. Tax Court and the Court of Federal Claims also remain shielded, at least for the moment. Roberts wrote that those questions would be addressed "another day." But for the vast majority of independent agencies—the regulatory bodies that oversee labor, energy, communications, and trade—the constitutional foundation beneath their independence has cracked. What Congress built to insulate expertise and deliberation from political pressure now stands vulnerable to presidential will.
Notable Quotes
Neither Congress nor the courts may saddle him with those with whom he cannot work. Subordinates who exercise the President's power are subject to removal by him.— Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority
Today the majority reshapes our Government. Dozens of independent commissions are now likely to become purely executive agencies, shifting tremendous power over broad swaths of American life into the President's hands.— Justice Sonia Sotomayor, dissenting
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why did this case matter enough for the Supreme Court to overturn ninety years of settled law?
Because Rebecca Slaughter's firing forced the court to answer a fundamental question: can Congress create agencies that the president cannot control? Trump's administration said no. The court agreed.
But didn't Congress create these agencies for a reason?
Yes. After the Depression, Congress wanted independent bodies to regulate markets and protect workers without political interference. The idea was that expertise and deliberation should matter more than whoever occupied the White House.
So what changes now?
The president can fire anyone from these agencies whenever he wants. No cause needed. That means a president can reshape the FTC, the labor board, the energy commission—all the bodies that regulate huge parts of American life—simply by replacing the people who run them.
Is there any protection left?
The Federal Reserve kept its protections, at least for now. And judges on certain courts. But for the rest—the agencies that touch most people's lives—no. The court said it's leaving those questions for another day.
What did Sotomayor think?
She thought the majority had just handed the president a weapon. She said it shifts tremendous power into one person's hands. She was angry enough to read her dissent from the bench, which almost never happens.
And Slaughter herself—what happened to her?
She lost. She was fired without cause, sued to get her job back, won at the lower courts, but the Supreme Court's ruling made her case moot. The law she relied on no longer exists.