US Supreme Court considers another step in favour of presidential powers sought by Trump

Key Highlights

• EU slaps 120-mn-euro fine on Elon Musk’s X, igniting tensions with Trump administrationAmong those ousted was Rebecca Slaughter of the Federal Trade Commission, whose removal is central to the case now before the court.
• Trump has also successfully pushed out officials from the National Labor Relations Board, the Merit Systems Protection Board, and the Consumer Product Safety Commission. Only two officials have resisted attempts to unseat them: Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook and Shira Perlmutter, the Library of Congress’s top copyright officer.
• The court has hinted that the Fed may be treated differently from other independent bodies, and Trump has publicly pressed for Cook’s removal over claims of mortgage fraud — allegations she denies. For decades, conservatives who subscribe to the “unitary executive” theory have viewed Humphrey’s Executor as an obstacle to a stronger presidency.
• The upcoming case could give the court its most direct opportunity yet to dismantle that barrier. Quick ReadsView AllEx-Pentagon official says Trump merits a Nobel for 'uniting India–Russia'South Africa: 11 killed as gunmen open fire at hostel in PretoriaThe decision ushered in an era of powerful independent federal agencies charged with regulating labor relations, employment discrimination, the air waves and much else. Proponents of the unitary executive theory have said the modern administrative state gets the Constitution all wrong: Federal agencies that are part of the executive branch answer to the president, and that includes the ability to fire their leaders at will. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS ADAs Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in a 1988 dissent that has taken on mythical status among conservatives, “this does not mean some of the executive power, but all of the executive power.”Since 2010 and under Roberts’ leadership, the Supreme Court has steadily whittled away at laws restricting the president’s ability to fire people. In 2020, Roberts wrote for the court that “the President’s removal power is the rule, not the exception” in a decision upholding Trump’s firing of the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau despite job protections similar to those upheld in Humphrey’s case. In the 2024 immunity decision that spared Trump from being prosecuted for his effort.