- within Litigation and Mediation & Arbitration topic(s)
- in United States
- with readers working within the Banking & Credit and Healthcare industries
- within Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration and Employment and HR topic(s)
- with Inhouse Counsel
On December 8, 2025, the Justices heard oral argument in Trump v. Slaughter (No. 25-332). The Supreme Court plans to decide (1) whether the statutory removal protections for independent, multi-member federal agencies violate the separation of powers (and, if so, whether the Supreme Court should sack its 1935 decision in Humphrey's Executor v. United States) and (2) whether the judiciary has the power to prevent one's removal from public office.
President Trump originally appointed Rebecca Slaughter to the Federal Trade Commission in 2018. Her term was set to end in 2025, but President Biden re-appointed her, extending her term to 2029. Upon his return to office, President Trump sent Slaughter a letter noticing her removal from the FTC, noting that Slaughter's service was "inconsistent with [the Trump] Administration's priorities."
Slaughter sued the President, the FTC Chairman, another FTC Commissioner, and the FTC's Executive Director. The district court granted her summary judgment, holding that Humphrey's Executor established protections for FTC Commissioners. The D.C. Circuit denied a stay pending appeal, again citing Humphrey's Executor. The President sought a stay from the Supreme Court, which was ultimately treated as a petition for the justices to take up the case before a judgment in the court of appeals. The Supreme Court granted review, with Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson in disagreement.
The President argues that Article II grants him broad power to remove executive officers, that this power extends to administrative agencies like the FTC, and that Humphrey's Executor should be overruled. The President also argues that courts violate Article II by blocking the President's removal of executive officers. Slaughter argues that multi-member agencies, such as the FTC, advance the separation of powers. Slaughter also argues that the Constitution does not allow for an "absolute rule of at-will removal" of executive officers.
During oral argument, Justice Sotomayor told Solicitor General Sauer that the President was "asking [the Court] to destroy the structure of government and to take away from Congress its ability to protect its idea that the government is better structured with some agencies that are independent." Other Justices seemed more skeptical of Slaughter's position. Justice Thomas questioned whether Congress could "limit the removal authority of the President in a newly created executive branch agency." Justice Kavanaugh thought that the "broad delegations to unaccountable independent agencies raise enormous constitutional and real-world problems for individual liberty."
Before the term started, the Supreme Court stayed the lower court orders in Harris v. Bessent (D.D.C. Case No. 25-cv-412) and Wilcox v. Trump (D.D.C. Case No. 25-cv-334), consolidated before the Supreme Court in Trump v. Wilcox (No. 24A966). Wilcox concerns President Trump's removal of Gwynne Wilcox from the National Labor Relations Board. Harris concerns President Trump's removal of Cathy Harris from the Merit Systems Protection Board. The Court's forthcoming decision in Slaughter, expected later this term, will likely determine the outcome of Harris and Wilcox.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
