Thursday, 30 Oct 2025
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • DMCA
logo logo
  • World
  • Politics
  • Crime
  • Economy
  • Tech & Science
  • Sports
  • Entertainment
  • More
    • Education
    • Celebrities
    • Culture and Arts
    • Environment
    • Health and Wellness
    • Lifestyle
  • 🔥
  • Trump
  • VIDEO
  • House
  • White
  • ScienceAlert
  • Trumps
  • Watch
  • man
  • Health
  • Season
Font ResizerAa
American FocusAmerican Focus
Search
  • World
  • Politics
  • Crime
  • Economy
  • Tech & Science
  • Sports
  • Entertainment
  • More
    • Education
    • Celebrities
    • Culture and Arts
    • Environment
    • Health and Wellness
    • Lifestyle
Follow US
© 2024 americanfocus.online – All Rights Reserved.
American Focus > Blog > Politics > Supreme Court Will Hear Oral Argument Over Trump’s Fed Firing
Politics

Supreme Court Will Hear Oral Argument Over Trump’s Fed Firing

Last updated: October 2, 2025 5:17 pm
Share
Supreme Court Will Hear Oral Argument Over Trump’s Fed Firing
SHARE

This article was originally published  by The Epoch Times: Supreme Court Will Hear Oral Argument Over Trump’s Fed Firing

In an intriguing turn of events, the Supreme Court has decided to sift through the murky waters of presidential powers by hearing a case involving Federal Reserve board member Lisa Cook. The court’s order, issued on October 1, allows Cook to remain in her post while she contests former President Donald Trump’s attempt to fire her. The upcoming oral arguments are set for January 2026, a date that might as well be a century away in the fast-paced world of politics.

According to the court’s directive, “The application for stay presented to The Chief Justice and by him referred to the Court is deferred pending oral argument in January 2026.” This nifty piece of legal jargon essentially allows Cook to breathe a temporary sigh of relief as the court sets the stage for future deliberations.

The backstory here is the fundamental clash over the extent of a president’s control over key executive branch positions. Trump had implored the court to intervene after a lower court halted the termination, and the Supreme Court’s recent order effectively allows Cook to hold onto her position—at least for now.

This case, alongside another titled Trump v. Slaughter, raises significant questions about pre-existing limits on presidential authority. The crux of the matter harks back to the respected precedent established in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, where the court established that Congress could impose constraints on the president’s ability to dismiss certain officials.

See also  JUST IN: Biden Judge Bars DHS From Transferring Illegal Aliens to Other Agencies After Four Venezuelan Gang Members Were Flown from Gitmo to El Salvador |

In December, the Supreme Court is expected to deliberate on the Trump v. Slaughter case, which revolves around his aim to fire a Federal Trade Commission member. The stakes are high, as decisions in both cases could redefine the balance of power between the presidency and regulatory bodies.

Cook’s ousting was claimed to be based on alleged falsehoods in her mortgage applications—a charge Trump communicated in a letter dated August 25, accusing her of misrepresenting her primary residence. “It is inconceivable that you were not aware of your first commitment when making the second,” he asserted, exhibiting all the subtlety of a sledgehammer in the world of nuanced legal discourse.

Under the Federal Reserve Act, which provides the president the authority to remove board members “for cause,” the interpretation of what constitutes sufficient cause is under scrutiny. The question looms large: what qualifies as a valid reason for dismissal? A legal expert from Georgetown University has suggested Trump’s allegations might compel a high court ruling on the standards required for a “for cause” firing—a standard traditionally tied to serious misconduct.

Cook, for her part, argues that Trump’s reasoning lacks legally recognized validity and could undermine the historical independence of the Federal Reserve. Her attorney, Abbe Lowell, characterized the court’s decision as a win for institutional integrity, indicating enthusiasm for further proceedings in line with the court’s directive.

Historically, Trump has had the Supreme Court’s blessing when it comes to dismissing bureaucrats without the formality of oral arguments, much to the dismay of Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, who have pushed back against such actions. Kagan has notably asserted that the president cannot, as he did in this instance, remove an FTC Commissioner without justifiable cause—an endorsement of the standards set by Humphrey’s Executor.

See also  WATCH: War Room's Natalie Winters Impales NYT's Call for 'Comprehensive National Civic Uprising' Against President Trump (Video) |

The ruling from that key case articulated that Congress holds the power to restrict the president’s removals if the agency principals operate in quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial capacities. While the Supreme Court has yet to issue its final word on the matter, it appears to regard the Federal Reserve’s unique, quasi-private nature differently than that of the labor boards from which Trump has removed officials in the past, hinting at a more nuanced interpretation.

In a May opinion, the Supreme Court indicated skepticism about comparing the status of dismissed officials with those at the Federal Reserve. The latter, they noted, exists within a distinct historical context—rooted deeply in the fabric of U.S. financial governance.

Andrew Moran contributed to this report.

If you found this article interesting, please consider supporting traditional journalism

Our first edition was published 25 years ago from a basement in Atlanta. Today, The Epoch Times brings fact-based, award-winning journalism to millions of Americans.

Our journalists have faced threats, arrests, and assault, yet our commitment to independent journalism remains unwavering. This year marks our 25th year of independent reporting, unhindered by corporate or political influences.

For a limited time, we invite you to join millions celebrating independent news with our introductory offer of just $1 per week.

TAGGED:argumentcourtFedfiringhearOralSupremeTrumps
Share This Article
Twitter Email Copy Link Print
Previous Article Abra Spring 2026 Ready-to-Wear Collection Abra Spring 2026 Ready-to-Wear Collection
Next Article John Wiley & Sons’ (WLY) Dividend History and What it Means for October Buyers John Wiley & Sons’ (WLY) Dividend History and What it Means for October Buyers
Leave a comment

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Popular Posts

CNN Jumps Into Fashion With Hire of Washington Post Critic Rachel Tashjian

CNN frequently navigates the corridors of power, but is now prepared to take on the…

October 7, 2025

Arabic Movies, Series Exploring Fresh, Often Edgier Themes

Family secrets, hidden pasts, and personal growth have emerged as the most popular themes in…

October 17, 2024

How many points did LeBron James score tonight against Minnesota Timberwolves? (April 23)

LeBron James showcased his prowess for the LA Lakers in Game 2 of the 2025…

April 22, 2025

Brooklyn Beckham’s Ex Lexi Wood Calls David and Victoria the ‘Coolest’

Brooklyn Beckham Ex Reveals Beckham Family Dynamics Amid Tensions Insights from Lexi Wood Published May…

May 7, 2025

Restoring Common Sense to Federal Procurement – The White House

By the authority granted to me as President under the Constitution and the laws of…

April 15, 2025

You Might Also Like

Heritage president backs Tucker Carlson after interview with Holocaust-denier Nick Fuentes
Politics

Heritage president backs Tucker Carlson after interview with Holocaust-denier Nick Fuentes

October 30, 2025
Trump turns up the pressure on Indiana Republicans to redistrict
Politics

Trump turns up the pressure on Indiana Republicans to redistrict

October 30, 2025
Kristi Noem Falls Face First Into JB Pritzker’s Trap
Politics

Kristi Noem Falls Face First Into JB Pritzker’s Trap

October 30, 2025
Lawmaker resigns after involvement in racist chat
Politics

Lawmaker resigns after involvement in racist chat

October 30, 2025
logo logo
Facebook Twitter Youtube

About US


Explore global affairs, political insights, and linguistic origins. Stay informed with our comprehensive coverage of world news, politics, and Lifestyle.

Top Categories
  • Crime
  • Environment
  • Sports
  • Tech and Science
Usefull Links
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • DMCA

© 2024 americanfocus.online –  All Rights Reserved.

Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Lost your password?