The Roberts Court Just Put Trump in Charge of Independent Agencies, Vastly Expanding His Powers

[Celerity]

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2026/06/the-roberts-court-just-put-trump-in-charge-of-independent-agencies-vastly-expanding-his-powers/



The Supreme Court on Monday gave the president the authority to remove the leadership of most agencies that Congress had set up to act independently of presidential control. The ruling in Trump v. Slaughter may seem technical, but it represents a radical change in how our American government has functioned since the 1930s and, in some cases, since the founding, by creating agencies that operate with independence from presidential control and the expediency of presidential politics. Rather than allow Congress to decide how much control the president can exercise over an agency that Congress creates, the Supreme Court has seized that power for itself. Starting today, nine justices will decide which agency heads can be fired by the president and which cannot.

Today’s decision overturns a 91-year-old precedent, called Humphrey’s Executor, in which a unanimous Supreme Court upheld Congress’ authority to give independent commissioners protection from presidential removal. In his majority decision, Chief Justice Roberts derides this critical precedent while downplaying the gravity of overturning it. “If anything more is left of Humphrey’s, we overrule it,” Roberts stated in his 6-3 opinion joined by other GOP appointees. “Humphrey’s has for decades been a result in search of a rationale.”

The decision stems from President Donald Trump’s illegal firing of Rebecca Slaughter, a President Joe Biden appointee to the Federal Trade Commission. At the onset of his second term, Trump began firing Democratic appointees to independent agencies in violation of federal law, which protected their removal except for sufficient cause. He removed Biden appointees at the National Labor Relations Board, the Merit System Protection Board, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, among others. These agencies are designed to be insulated from immediate presidential control. They are run by a bipartisan board of commissioners who serve staggered terms. And unlike appointees to cabinet departments, the president cannot remove them over policy differences. The power to remove is the power to control. An impending firing can sway the decision-making of commissioners—and if it doesn’t, they can get the boot.

In a blistering dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor warned that chaos will ensue. “Today, the majority reshapes our Government,” she wrote, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. “Dozens of independent commissions are now likely to become purely executive agencies, shifting tremendous power over broad swaths of American life into the President’s hands.” It does this, she wrote, in the service of the majority’s “half-baked theory of executive power that is simultaneously all encompassing yet also subject to necessary but undefined exceptions. The one thing that does appear to be clear going forward is that chaos will follow.”

snip

[malaise]

1. Scary indeed

Rec
These fascists in the SC are the most activist judges I’ve ever seen.

[dalton99a]

3. +1

[orangecrush]

2. This country is fucked

That is all.

[Fiendish Thingy]

4. It's essentially a return to the "spoils" system of government

The country survived that period, but was better off when it was eliminated.

Nothing that killing the filibuster and expanding the court in 2029 wouldn’t solve.

[FHRRK1]

8. This is the opening for expansion

Names for replacement for every agency should be gathered and vetted.

Within 30 days of inauguration every Trump appointment needs to be purged.

Republicans are counting on Dems playing fair, and if not to have the SC rule against Dems on the exact same issue.

The next President should call out the Robert’s SC directly in the inaugural speech. LAWS MUST BE EQUALLY APPLIED!

Then when the SC reverses and tries to say a Dem President can’t replace heads, then immediately pivot to Court expansion.

Saw some idiot prick talking head on MSNOW a couple weekends ago stating that Dems will need to be concilitory when they take over.

FUCK THAT IDIOCRACY. We need to crush these assholes.

[Fiendish Thingy]

9. The next Dem president shouldn't give this SCOTUS a chance to interfere

First 30 days - purge of Trumpsters, hiring spree.
Second 30 days- nominations and confirmation of 4-6 new justices after Congress passes court expansion.

After that- trigger cases restoring voting rights, Roe, ending the spoils system, etc.

[Solly Mack]

5. Yep. They bowed to the "unitary executive" (i.e. tyrannical) of the conservative movement.

The long goal of shrinking government until it is no longer helpful to the people and is, instead, acting directly in opposition to the people, with a favored (monied, white, straight, christian, male) class being protected.

Deregulations through the destruction of the administrative state is accomplishing this, along with the dissolution of certain agencies altogether, and placing all the power into one branch - neutering Congress and giving a tinpot tyrant ultimate power under the color of law granted by the court.

The conservative members of the court are complicit in Trump's crimes and in the assault on America.

[DFW]

6. Oh, but they will repeal themselves......

Just as soon as the next Democratic President is inaugurated.

[Fiendish Thingy]

11. If we elect courageous Dems, they won't get the chance

If Dems have the courage to expand the court, then the new majority will make new rulings, but not until after the president has purged the Trumpers.

[moondust]

7. "watchdogs to lapdogs"

That's what litigant Rebecca Slaughter boiled the new reality down to a few minutes ago on Deadline: White House.

I'll take a wild guess that Clarence and the gang of piggies simply cannot control their greed and the new toady lapdogs running many agencies will help them get richer faster, richer faster, richer faster, richer faster, richer faster, ...

[Pinback]

10. Coming up: Partisan hacks from top to bottom.

Disgusting that a court dominated by partisan hacks would rule this way, but not surprising.

The death of governmental expertise will have destructive consequences for the country. When this corrupt era finally, mercifully wanes, Democrats must find a way to permanently do away with any whiff of the “unitary executive” justification for a rotating autocracy.

[struggle4progress]

12. They're fascist assholes. They want to be fascist assholes. They think it is an honorable title

[Lonestarblue]

13. We the people now have very little say on anything.

We are now government of the people, by the rich, for the rich. Not exactly what our traditions and laws say.

[Manatee]

14. Not just Trump...

all Presidents.

[ColoringFool]

16. Maybe, Maybe Not. Bush v. Gore, e.g., Was Deemed "No Precedent."

[JMCKUSICK]

15. I haven't seen this take, but thank God for this ruling,

As it means our next president can fire all of them without all these court delays!

[GiqueCee]

17. The decision...

... authored, I believe, by John Roberts, is just another nail in the coffin of his integrity. He has long been a supporter of the diseased concept of a "Unitary Executive" – read DICTATORSHIP – that Cheney and Rumsfeld were so horny for. Now we've got it. Happy now, you evil fucks?
Chief Justice Roberts' benign smile masks a sick and evil mind. He has always been a racist, and even just a cursory glance at his history proves that he is the last person on Earth that should even be on the Supreme Court, never mind rule over it.
He should be impeached even before Trump.