Supreme Court appears likely to approve Trump’s firing of FTC Democrat

The Supreme Court appears inclined to alter a long-standing precedent that has governed the removal of Federal Trade Commission (FTC) members for nearly a century. The justices, leaning conservative, may empower the president with increased authority over the FTC and possibly other independent agencies like the Federal Communications Commission. This legal debate stems from former FTC Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter's lawsuit against former President Trump after he dismissed her and another Democratic commissioner in March. Slaughter's argument hinges on the 1935 Supreme Court decision in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, which established that a president could only remove FTC commissioners for specific reasons such as inefficiency, neglect, or misconduct. During recent oral arguments, Chief Justice John Roberts remarked that the Humphrey’s Executor precedent has lost its relevance, describing it as a "dried husk" that fails to reflect the current powers of the FTC. He referenced the 2020 ruling in Seila Law, which clarified that the for-cause removal protections established in Humphrey’s Executor do not apply to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which wields substantial executive powers. The Trump administration contends that the current FTC operates under a different framework, given its significant executive authority. However, a federal appeals court upheld Slaughter's position, stating that the FTC's powers are consistent with those recognized in the 1935 ruling. Despite this, the Supreme Court has issued a stay that prevents Slaughter from resuming her role on the FTC until it decides on the merits of the case. Chief Justice Roberts noted that the original Humphrey’s Executor decision addressed an agency with minimal executive power, which may explain the broad consensus among the justices at that time.