Supreme Court Indicates Its Time For Biggest Shakeup To Federal Bureaucracy In Nearly A Century
The era of “independent agencies” may soon be over.
The Supreme Court appeared inclined Monday to allow the president to fire members of “independent” multi-member coalitions, which the Trump administration says are effectively a “headless fourth branch” of government that operates without political accountability or democratic oversight.
The case of Trump v. Slaughter focuses on a simple question: Can President Donald Trump fire Federal Commerce Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter? His decision is hampered by a 90-year-old precedent, Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, which limits the president’s ability to remove members of multi-member commissions like the FTC without cause.
Conservative judges have given the green light to several attempts by Trump to remove other agency officials since he took office in January, including members of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). (RELATED: The Supreme Court’s ‘Trump mandate’ could end up reshaping the executive branch)
Judicial observers interpreted these emergency rulings as an indication that the justices were prepared to get rid of Humphrey’s executor altogether. Strong signals from the majority during oral arguments seemed to confirm that this was the likely outcome.
Chief Justice John Roberts called the precedent “a dried-up shell of whatever people thought it was” because the FTC is very different today than it was in 1935.
A protester holds up a sign in front of the United States Supreme Court as the Court hears arguments in the case regarding President Donald Trump’s firing of Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter last March in Washington, DC, December 8, 2025. (Photo by Jim WATSON/AFP via Getty Images)
“Real World Realities”
Over the past century, Congress has vested legislative and judicial powers in agencies with the expectation that they would not be entirely under the president’s control, Justice Eleana Kagan noted. She told Solicitor General John Sauer that the formal constitutional argument should not blind her to the “real world realities” of overthrowing Humphrey’s executor, essentially, creating a president who has “control of everything.”
“So the result of what you want is that the president will have massive, unchecked, uncontrolled power, not only to carry out traditional executions, but also to legislate through legislative and jurisdictional frameworks,” she said.
Justice Neil Gorsuch suggested that the real problem was that the Supreme Court allowed Congress to delegate its legislative power to the executive branch.
“This court has allowed this for a very long time,” he said. “I understand that this allowed for an agreement in which much legislative power was transferred to these agencies. If they are now to be controlled by the president, it seems all the more imperative that something be done.”
Justice Brett Kaganaugh questioned why no president in the past 90 years has directly challenged this precedent.
“The president may sometimes have a political interest in allowing decisions to be outsourced to agencies over which he has no control,” Sauer suggested.
Justice Kagan questions the “real” impact of ending restrictions on removals, given the legislative and judicial functions that Congress has entrusted to “independent agencies” over the past century. pic.twitter.com/Ewnw5xB3LE
– Katelynn Richardson (@katesrichardson) December 8, 2025
Where are the limits?
Several justices examined how far the logic of Slaughter’s position extends, questioning whether Congress could take over existing agencies and convert them into multi-member commissions, letting “experts” dictate policy while gutting the president’s impeachment power.
“Could Congress convert all these departments into multi-member commissions? » asked Justice Brett Kavanaugh. “Commerce, EPA, Department of Homeland Security, Department of State?
Amit Agarwal, representing the fired FTC commissioner, said many of these agencies exercise too much of the president’s authority to be converted.
“One thing that history shows is that we cannot anticipate what might happen,” Judge Amy Coney Barrett said. “If we decide this matter in your favor now, we don’t know what a Congress might do 15, 20, 30 years from now.”
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent, nonpartisan news service, is available free to any legitimate news publisher capable of delivering a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and DCNF affiliation. For questions about our guidelines or our partnership, please contact licenses@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
