The Supreme Court signaled Monday that it is prepared to embrace expansive firing powers for the president, as the justices allowed President Trump to move ahead with booting a member of the Federal Trade Commission.
The high court put on hold a lower ruling that had ordered Mr. Trump to reinstate Rebecca Slaughter to the FTC, saying her ouster contradicted a 90-year-old precedent that limited presidential firing powers.
The justices said Mr. Trump can keep Ms. Slaughter out of office for now, and they sped the case to their full docket, setting up a major decision on when a president can fire people.
The justices also tipped their hand about where they are headed in the case, asking lawyers to file briefs over whether to “overrule” the 1935 precedent and also asking whether judges have any power to halt a presidential firing.
In order to allow the firing to proceed, the court’s majority on Monday had to conclude that Mr. Trump is likely to prevail in the case — in other words, that his firing was legal.
All three Democrat-appointed members of the court dissented, saying the case threatens to upend the system of bipartisan and independent agencies that run much of the government.
They also chided their colleagues for using interim rulings to rewrite the scope of executive powers.
“Our emergency docket should never be used, as it has been this year, to permit what our own precedent bars,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote. “Still more, it should not be used, as it also has been, to transfer government authority from Congress to the president, and thus to reshape the nation’s separation of powers.”
At issue is a ruling known as Humphrey’s Executor, the 1935 decision where the court blocked President Franklin D. Roosevelt from firing a member of the FTC.
The justices said the FTC was set up to be an independent, bipartisan body and Congress was justified in protecting members from firing except in cases where there was good cause.
That ruling has been used over the years to limit presidential firing powers in other contexts.
Mr. Trump has upended that with a wave of firings across the federal bureaucracy.
That includes firing of members of the National Labor Relations Board, the Merit Systems Protection Board, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Office of Special Counsel, the Federal Election Commission, the Library of Congress and, most recently, the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.
All but the Federal Reserve firing were done for policy differences rather than for “cause.”
Opponents say Mr. Trump is systematically removing Democrats from boards that were meant to be bipartisan.
The justices have been generally receptive to Mr. Trump’s argument, allowing him to proceed with firings despite the 1935 precedent.
Justice Kagan said that made Monday’s order all the more surprising, because that precedent remains intact, for now, the court’s majority went too far.
“Until the deed is done, Humphrey’s controls, and prevents the majority from giving the president the unlimited removal power Congress denied him,” Justice Kagan wrote.
Court critics cast Monday’s order as the latest in a string of decisions that have granted Mr. Trump extraordinary powers, dating back to a 2024 decision on presidential immunity and a ruling earlier this year on universal injunctions.
• Stephen Dinan can be reached at sdinan@washingtontimes.com.