[DoodleDawg]

Is Fed Chairman a position that is somehow protected by some law? What prevents a president from firing him for any reason or no reason at all?

The Federal Reserve is an independent agency. Under the law the Fed Chair is appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, but once in office can only be removed for cause. Disagreeing with the President is not sufficient cause for removal.

[marajade]

As a 30 year former gov’t worker the gov’t can always find a reason for termination if they are looking for it. Powell is playing a dangerous game.

[DesertRhino]

Says you. The causes he can be removed for are completely undefined. He can easily justify it with job performance issues. He doesn’t have to be banging a secretary on the desk.

[The Pack Knight]

The Federal Reserve is an independent agency. Under the law the Fed Chair is appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, but once in office can only be removed for cause. Disagreeing with the President is not sufficient cause for removal.

I think there is a legitimate question as to the constitutionality of that provision, though. Going back to a case called Humphrey's Executor in 1935, the Supreme Court generally held that such "for cause" removal provisions for "independent" federal agencies do not violate Article II of the Constitution where the agency acts primarily in a quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial capacity. But Federal Reserve Board exercises what can only be considered executive power, and limiting the President's power to remove its members or its chairman seems to violate the Appointments Clause of Article II to me.

Of course, we can also talk about the constitutionality of any federal governmental body that is "independent" of Congress, the President, or the federal judiciary, but that genie seems to be out of the bottle.

[erkelly]

Disagreeing with your boss should be a firing offense, shouldn’t it? President Trump should have fired the whole dang govt the day he took office. He was very ill advised.