Key Points: John Roberts Independent Agency Rulings
- John Roberts independent agency rulings just dismantled a 91-year-old legal precedent
- Trump v. Slaughter lets presidents fire agency heads at will, in a 6-3 decision
- A companion case, Trump v. Cook, carved out a surprising exception for the Federal Reserve
- Critics call the two rulings contradictory, while supporters call it a necessary correction
Chief Justice John Roberts just reshaped how much control any president has over federal agencies, and he did it in two rulings issued on the very same day.
The bigger decision, Trump v. Slaughter, came down June 29 by a 6-3 vote, with Roberts writing for the majority.
Here’s the background driving this case. President Trump fired FTC Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter in March 2025, without citing any specific legal cause for her removal.
Slaughter fought back, arguing federal law required cause before removing commissioners from multimember independent agencies like the FTC.
Roberts sided against her. He wrote that the FTC exercises genuine executive power, meaning its leadership must answer directly to the president.
That single sentence carried enormous weight. It effectively overturned Humphrey’s Executor, a 1935 precedent that had protected independent agency leaders for 91 straight years.
Here’s the part that’s fueling real debate. On that same day, the Court issued a second ruling, Trump v. Cook, involving Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook.
In that case, by a narrower 5-4 vote, the Court sided with Cook, allowing her to keep her Fed seat while litigation continues in lower courts.
Roberts justified the difference by pointing to the Federal Reserve’s unique historical role, treating monetary policy independence as a special constitutional exception.
Critics have pounced on that inconsistency hard. Legal commentators argue Roberts essentially created a one-agency exemption inside a ruling designed to eliminate agency independence broadly.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s dissent captured that tension directly, warning the ruling unleashes chaos without ever explaining where its own logic actually ends.
The practical fallout is already visible too. Agencies like the Merit Systems Protection Board and National Labor Relations Board have lost quorum, unable to issue final decisions on pending cases.
Energy regulators are watching closely as well, since critics warn agencies like FERC and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission could face similar removal fights next.
With litigation over Cook’s Fed seat still unresolved, and other independent agency leaders watching nervously, this legal fight over presidential power is far from finished.