By John Kruzel
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court allowed President Donald Trump’s firing of two Democratic members of federal labor boards to remain in effect while their legal challenges proceed in a dispute that tests his power over independent government agencies.
The court also sought to allay concerns voiced by critics of the Republican president that letting him fire the two officials would jeopardize the independence of the U.S. Federal Reserve.
The court temporarily blocked orders by two separate Washington-based federal judges that had shielded Cathy Harris from being dismissed from the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) and Gwynne Wilcox from being removed from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) before their terms expire. Their legal challenges are ongoing in lower courts. Both were appointed by Trump’s Democratic predecessor Joe Biden.
In a brief, unsigned opinion, the court said that Thursday’s action “reflects our judgment that the government is likely to show that both the NLRB and MSPB exercise considerable executive power.”
“Because the Constitution vests the executive power in the president,” the court wrote, “he may remove without cause executive officers who exercise that power on his behalf, subject to narrow exceptions recognized by our precedents.”
The court has a 6-3 conservative majority. Its three liberal justices dissented from the order.
Concerns have arisen in Washington that empowering Trump to oust Harris and Wilcox could imperil the Fed’s independence.
“We disagree,” the court stated. “The Federal Reserve is a uniquely structured, quasi-private entity that follows in the distinct historical tradition of the First and Second Banks of the United States.”
Trump rattled financial markets by criticizing Powell over the Fed’s decision, for now, not to further cut interest rates, even calling the Fed chief a “major loser.” Trump deescalated the matter by saying he has no plans to fire Powell but previously said he believes the Fed chief would leave if he asked him to do so.
The legal fight over the firings of Harris and Wilcox has become an important test of Trump’s efforts to bring under his sway federal agencies meant by Congress to be independent from a president’s direct control.
Deepak Gupta, a lawyer for Wilcox, emphasized that the court’s action on Thursday was not a final decision on underlying legal merits of Trump’s firings, adding that “we look forward to pressing our case in court.”
Trump’s move to oust Harris and Wilcox was part of his far-reaching shakeup and downsizing of the U.S. government, including firing thousands of workers, dismantling federal agencies, installing loyalists in key jobs and purging career officials.
Chief Justice John Roberts on April 9 temporarily halted the judicial orders blocking Trump’s firing of the two. The labor boards subsequently confirmed that Harris and Wilcox were no longer in their posts.
PRESIDENTIAL POWER
U.S. District Judges Rudolph Contreras and Beryl Howell separately upheld federal laws protecting officials serving in these posts from being fired without cause, rejecting Trump’s argument that the measures passed by Congress encroach on authority granted to the president under the U.S. Constitution.
The judges ruled that statutory protections for board members from being removed without cause conform with the Constitution in light of a 1935 Supreme Court precedent in a case called Humphrey’s Executor v. United States. That ruling held that a president lacks unfettered power to remove commissioners of the Federal Trade Commission, faulting President Franklin Roosevelt’s firing of a commissioner for policy differences.
Liberal Justice Elena Kagan wrote in a dissent that Thursday’s order was “nothing short of extraordinary,” adding that the court’s majority had allowed Trump to “overrule Humphrey’s by fiat” while the legal challenges proceed.
“Our Humphrey’s decision remains good law, and it forecloses both the president’s firings and the court’s decision to award emergency relief,” wrote Kagan, joined by fellow liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Biden appointed Harris in 2022 to a seven-year term. Trump moved to fire her in February after naming Henry Kerner, a Republican, as acting MSPB chair.
Federal workers who lose their jobs can bring a challenge before the merit board, an independent three-member panel with quasi-judicial powers, seeking reinstatement.
The removal of Harris would leave the board without a quorum, making it unable to decide cases. Federal law lets a president remove MSPB officials only with cause such as inefficiency, neglect of duty or malfeasance.
The judge overseeing Wilcox’s case upheld similar job protections for the NLRB.
The NLRB, with five members when fully stocked, enforces laws protecting the rights of private-sector workers to organize, join labor unions and advocate for better working conditions, and oversees union elections.
Biden named Wilcox, the first Black woman on the NLRB, to a second five-year term in 2023. Trump moved to fire her in January. Without Wilcox, the board lacks a quorum.
(Reporting by John Kruzel; Editing by Will Dunham)
