--- title: "The Supreme Court fiercely debates Trump's \"firing power,\" the independence of the Federal Reserve's \"last line of defense\" may be in jeopardy" type: "News" locale: "zh-CN" url: "https://longbridge.com/zh-CN/news/269015850.md" description: "The U.S. Supreme Court is considering whether to grant Trump the power to dismiss officials of independent agencies, which could affect the independence of the Federal Reserve. Justice Kavanaugh expressed concerns about the independence of the Federal Reserve, believing that a broad interpretation of the dismissal power could undermine it. The conservative majority of the Supreme Court tends to support the government and may overturn a 90-year precedent, but the dismissal of Federal Reserve officials still faces challenges" datetime: "2025-12-09T01:14:05.000Z" locales: - [zh-CN](https://longbridge.com/zh-CN/news/269015850.md) - [en](https://longbridge.com/en/news/269015850.md) - [zh-HK](https://longbridge.com/zh-HK/news/269015850.md) --- > 支持的语言: [English](https://longbridge.com/en/news/269015850.md) | [繁體中文](https://longbridge.com/zh-HK/news/269015850.md) # The Supreme Court fiercely debates Trump's "firing power," the independence of the Federal Reserve's "last line of defense" may be in jeopardy The Zhitong Finance APP learned that a key Supreme Court justice in the United States expressed his desire to protect the independence of the Federal Reserve. Meanwhile, the conservative-majority Supreme Court is considering whether to grant President Donald Trump the power to dismiss members of the Federal Trade Commission and other similar independent agency officials. During Monday's debate, Justice Brett Kavanaugh raised several questions related to the Federal Reserve. He asked the government's chief lawyer, Deputy Attorney General John Saul, to respond to opponents' arguments that a broad interpretation of Trump's dismissal power in the FTC case would ultimately undermine the independence of the Federal Reserve. "I share the same concerns," said Justice Kavanaugh, who was appointed by Trump during his first term. The Supreme Court indicated on Monday that its 6-3 conservative majority is likely to support the government in this case, overturning a 90-year precedent, which could allow Trump to dismiss heads of dozens of traditionally independent federal agencies. However, there are also signs that the government may face difficulties if it seeks to dismiss Federal Reserve members without just cause. The justices will not hear another challenge to Trump's attempt to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook until January 21 of next year, but the future of the relationship between the Federal Reserve and the White House is already overshadowed by Monday's hearing. Saul acknowledged that the Supreme Court had previously indicated that it considers the Federal Reserve a special case regarding the issue of allowing the president to dismiss members without cause. He told Kavanaugh that the government is not directly challenging Congress's protection clause that requires "just cause" for dismissing Federal Reserve members. The Justice Department's argument is that the court cannot retroactively question how the president exercises that dismissal power. However, several liberal-leaning justices pressed Saul, questioning how the mechanism to exclude certain agencies (such as the Federal Reserve) would work under the government's broad claim in the FTC case that "Congress cannot limit the president's ability to control the exercise of executive function officials." Kavanaugh expressed "serious doubts" about the government's position that judges have no authority to reinstate officials who were wrongfully dismissed. He stated that this would be a "circumvention" of potential exceptions to the president's dismissal power (for example, concerning the Federal Reserve and certain specialized courts dealing with U.S. government tax and monetary claims). Saul responded that the Supreme Court has recognized the view that the harm caused by forcing the government to reaccept an official vetoed by the president outweighs the personal interests of that official. ## The "Special Case" of the Agency In a series of cases this year regarding dismissal power, the Supreme Court has mostly supported the White House, but in May, it indicated that it considers the Federal Reserve a different entity within the U.S. government. In an unsigned court order, the justices described the Federal Reserve as "a uniquely structured, quasi-private entity that follows the unique historical traditions of the First and Second Banks of the United States." In October, the justices rejected Trump's request to immediately dismiss Cook (who denied allegations of mortgage fraud), while the legal battle over her dismissal continues This contrasts with other orders issued this year by the conservative majority of the Supreme Court, which allowed Trump’s dismissals of other agency officials to take effect during the case proceedings. Former Federal Reserve officials warned that making it easier for the president to dismiss members could undermine the U.S. economy, as the Fed's decisions on interest rates should not be influenced by short-term political considerations. In the FTC case, the Justice Department argued that the Supreme Court need not address the issue of the Fed's status. The government stated in a written brief that it was not conceding that the Fed's "good cause" protection clause is constitutional, but if the justices are inclined to support the clause, "that would be an agency-specific 'exception.'" The lawyer for the dismissed FTC member countered that if the Fed constituted a "historic exception" to the president's power to dismiss agency heads, then there could also be other "similarly historically grounded" exceptions, including the Federal Trade Commission. The hearing took place the day before the Fed's last policy meeting of the year. Observers expect Fed officials to cut rates for the third consecutive time at this meeting. Trump has exerted tremendous pressure on the Fed this year, demanding significant rate cuts and often doing so in a manner that insults and scrutinizes Fed Chairman Jerome Powell. Trump has also publicly expressed a desire to have a majority of members on the Fed board appointed by him—if Cook is removed, this prospect would come closer to reality. Powell has repeatedly emphasized the importance of the Fed's independence this year, while insisting that the Fed does not engage in partisan considerations when making policy. The Fed stated it would respect any court ruling regarding Cook. Cook has not missed any policy meetings this year, and she voted in favor of rate cuts at both meetings held after Trump attempted to dismiss her. Last month, she gave her first public speech following the dismissal attempt, outlining economic outlook and financial stability issues ## 相关资讯与研究 - [Report reveals inflation will come roaring back under Trump](https://longbridge.com/zh-CN/news/281421192.md) - [Analysis: Trump's Iran speech ignores the risks of a return to the 1970s](https://longbridge.com/zh-CN/news/281429917.md) - [Judge denies DOJ request to revive Federal Reserve subpoenas](https://longbridge.com/zh-CN/news/281654409.md) - [Dem Lawyer Suggests Trump May Have Had Sinister Reason For Showing Up At SCOTUS: ‘He’s Watching’](https://longbridge.com/zh-CN/news/281427706.md) - [Leo, the first US pope, emerges as pointed Trump critic](https://longbridge.com/zh-CN/news/281513774.md)