Supreme Court Poised to Upend 90-Year Precedent on FTC Firing Powers

Breaking News: Supreme Court Appears Likely to Approve Trump's Firing of FTC Democrat The Supreme Court's conservative justices seem poised to overturn a 90-year-old precedent that restricts the president's ability to fire Federal Trade Commission (FTC) members without cause. This ruling would grant President Trump significant power over the FTC and potentially other independent agencies, such as the Federal Communications Commission. During oral arguments yesterday, Chief Justice John Roberts expressed skepticism about the 1935 ruling in Humphreys Executor v. United States, which held that the president can only remove FTC commissioners for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office. Roberts stated that the 2020 ruling in Seila Law made it clear that Humphreys Executor is no longer a relevant authority. This sentiment was echoed by other conservative justices on the bench. The case in question involves former FTC Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, a Democrat, who sued Trump after he fired both Democrats from the commission in March. Slaughter's lawsuit relies heavily on the Humphreys Executor precedent, which has been the primary authority on this issue for nearly a century. If the Supreme Court upholds the president's authority to fire FTC members without cause, it would have significant implications for the FTC and other independent agencies. This could lead to increased politicization of these agencies and undermine their ability to function independently. The FTC has been a key player in enforcing consumer protection laws and regulating business practices. A shift in the balance of power at the FTC could have far-reaching consequences for the business community and consumers alike. The Supreme Court's decision is expected to be announced in the coming weeks. If the justices rule in favor of Trump, it would mark a significant expansion of the president's power over independent agencies.