Trump administration argues that decision stopping president from removing officers must be overruled
Arguments in the case that will decide whether Donald Trump can fire officials from independent agencies have started.
First up is solicitor general D John Sauer, arguing on behalf of the Trump administration.
He kicks off his opening remarks by arguing that the key 90-year precedent, known as the Humphrey’s Executor, “must be overruled”.
He describes the ruling as a “decaying husk with bold, and particularly dangerous pretensions” that ultimately creates a “headless fourth branch insulated from political accountability and democratic control”.
Share
Updated at 10.23 EST
Key events
Show key events only
Please turn on JavaScript to use this feature
A quick reminder that, in September, the supreme court granted a justice department request to block a lower court’s order that shielded Rebecca Slaughter, from being dismissed from the consumer protection and antitrust agency before her term expires in 2029. She will remain fired until the court issue their decision.
Share
While answering questions from justices today, Agarwal said that the “real world danger” if the administration is successful, is that “everything is on the chopping block”.
He added that there was “absolutely no principled basis” for “carving out” independent agencies from Congress’s purview.
“We’re talking about more than two dozen traditional independent agencies that have been established by statutes enacted by the people’s elected representatives and signed into law, all of them by democratically elected presidents,” Agarwal said.
Share
Updated at 11.44 EST
The bench just wrapped its questions to the administration’s lawyer, solicitor general D John Sauer.
Arguing on behalf of Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, the fired Democratic member of the FTC, is Amit Agarwal.
“Multi-member commissions with members enjoying some kind of removal protection have been part of our story since 1790,” Agarwal said in his opening remarks. “So if petitioners are right, all three branches of government have been wrong from the start.”
Share
Updated at 11.24 EST
Justice Jackson is now pushing back against the administration’s claims that these independent agencies aren’t answerable to Congress – which delegates their creation, oversight, budgets and laws.
“Part of your argument seemed to revolve around this notion that there’s some kind of thing happening with the independent agency that the reason why the president needs to control it is because they don’t answer to anybody,” she said.
“What I don’t understand from your overarching argument is why that determination of Congress, which makes perfect sense given its duty to protect the people of the United States, why that is subjugated to a concern about the president not being able to control everything.”
Share
Updated at 11.13 EST
As he responds to questions from justices today, Sauer has repeatedly argued that independent agencies like the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) are a “headless fourth branch” with limited government oversight.
When responding to questions from justice Brett Kavanaugh, the solicitor general said that these agencies exercise “a great deal of control over individuals and business” but “ultimately do not answer to the president”.
Share
Speaking now is the third liberal justice on the bench, Elena Kagan.
She says that what the administration is asking for would give the president “massive, unchecked, uncontrolled power” over independent agencies. It’s a role that Congress, with its Article I power, has controlled for 9o years.
Share
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, also pushed back on the administration’s premise – in line with justice Sotomayor’s line of questioning.
“I appreciate that Article II has some language in it that you’re pointing to, but as Justice Sotomayor pointed out, the constitution does not speak specifically to removal,” she said. “I don’t know why we’d make that inference when the power to create agencies and set everything up lies with Congress.”
She went on to probe the solicitor general as to why he thought that Congress was “somehow less democratically accountable” for the way in which it constructs agencies and determines the terms of its officers.
“You seem to think that there’s something about the president that requires him to control everything as a matter of democratic accountability, when on the other side, we have Congress saying we’d like these particular agencies and officers to be independent of presidential control for the good of the people,” Jackson said.
Share
Updated at 10.53 EST
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, one of three liberal justices on the bench, seemed unconvinced with the administration’s argument off the bat.
“You’re asking us to destroy the structure of government,” she told solicitor general D John Sauer. “To take away from Congress its ability to protect its idea that a government is better structured with some agencies that are independent.”
Share
Updated at 10.41 EST
Trump administration argues that decision stopping president from removing officers must be overruled
Arguments in the case that will decide whether Donald Trump can fire officials from independent agencies have started.
First up is solicitor general D John Sauer, arguing on behalf of the Trump administration.
He kicks off his opening remarks by arguing that the key 90-year precedent, known as the Humphrey’s Executor, “must be overruled”.
He describes the ruling as a “decaying husk with bold, and particularly dangerous pretensions” that ultimately creates a “headless fourth branch insulated from political accountability and democratic control”.
Share
Updated at 10.23 EST
Supreme court to hear arguments in case testing Trump’s ability to fire officials
In less than an hour, the supreme court will here arguments in a landmark case that tests Donald Trump’s ability to fire officials.
Earlier this year, the president moved to fire Rebecca Slaughter, a Democratic member of the Federal Trade Commission. Trump actually appointed her to the position back in 2018, and she was re-confirmed for a second term under Joe Biden that was set to expire in 2029.
Rebecca Slaughter during a House judiciary committee hearing in Washington DC, 13 July 2023. Photograph: Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images
One of the main questions the nine-justice bench will consider today is whether to overturn a key 1938 decision which established that the president requires Congress’ signoff to fire an official from an independent government agency, and it needs to be “for cause”.
Slaughter’s case is the latest emergency appeal that the supreme court will hear from the Trump administration, after a lower court judge blocked her firing, and an appeal court upheld that decision. A reminder that, in May, the court allowed Trump to remove two Democratic members of the National Labor Relations Board and Merit Systems Protection Board – despite job protections for these posts – while litigation challenging those removals proceeded. And in September, they deferred action on the Department of Justice’s request to allow Trump to fire Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook, at least until it hears oral arguments on the case in January.
Share
Updated at 11.18 EST
My colleague, Jakub Krupa, is covering the latest out of Europe, particularly the London meeting between Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy and several Nato allies – France’s Emmanuel Macron, UK prime minister Keir Starmer, and Germany’s chancellor Friedrich Merz.
Jakub notes:
The sombre tone of the opening remarks was highly telling: it’s clear that this was not merely another photo opportunity designed to merely convey solidarity with Zelenskyy, but they face urgent – increasingly so – issues that need to be resolved soon.
A reminder that Donald Trump Jr warned that his father may walk away from the Ukrainian war in a lengthy tirade against the purpose of continued fighting in Ukraine, as he also claimed Ukraine’s “corrupt” rich had fled their country leaving “what they believed to be the peasant class” to fight the war.
Meanwhile, the president said on Sunday that Russia is “fine” with the peace proposal (although he didn’t elaborate if this was the same framework that Moscow seemed initially unhappy with during Steve Witkoff’s visit). Trump added: “But I’m not sure that Zelenskyy’s fine with it. His people love it. But he isn’t ready.”
Share
A quick update, a White House official confirms to the Guardian that the president’s roundtable will be to unveil an assistance package for American farmers. He’ll be joined by treasury secretary Scott Bessent and agriculture secretary Brooke Rollins.
Share
Updated at 09.14 EST
Donald Trump is in Washington today. At 2pm ET he’ll host a roundtable event at the White House. Bloomberg reports that he will unveil a much-anticipated $12bn support package for American farmers who have been hit by the president’s sweeping tariff policies. We’re waiting from confirmation from the White House, but will bring you the latest lines as they come in.
Share
More than 2,000 national guard soldiers have been in Washington since Donald Trump’s initial deployment in August, part of the president’s contentious immigration and crime crackdown targeting Democratic-led cities.
In what was seen by many as an example of federal overreach, the president federalised DC’s Metropolitan police department for the first time in its history over the summer.
Trump said he was declaring a public safety emergency and putting the police under the control of the attorney general, Pam Bondi.
This was despite violent crime in Washington DC actually having fallen sharply since 2023.
Share
Updated at 08.09 EST
Smith says ‘there comes a time when you just know it’s time’ to step down
Axios broke the news of Pamela Smith’s resignation. Speaking to the outlet, she said: “There comes a time when you just know it’s time.”
Smith, who has 28 years of law enforcement experience, said her decision is not related to the deployment of national guard troops to the city.
Speaking to Fox 5 about her decision to resign, the outgoing police chief said it was a “tough” decision and was made to spend more time with her family.
She said:
I have been going nonstop. I have missed many amazing celebrations, birthdays, marriages, you name it, within our family.
And being able to come home for thanksgiving two years after my mum passed really resonated with me and has allowed me to make a decision that I think is necessary not just only for me but also for my family.
Smith is expected to step down on 31 December and the mayor’s office will name an interim chief shortly, according to Axios.
Share
Updated at 08.02 EST
