High Court Allows Trump to Remove FTC Official, Agrees to Hear Challenge to 1935 Precedent

The Supreme Court on Monday cleared the way for President Trump to remove a Federal Trade Commission commissioner and agreed to resolve long-standing constitutional questions about White House authority over independent agencies.

In an unsigned emergency order, the justices said they would permit the dismissal of Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter while the case proceeds.

They also agreed to hear arguments in December, signaling that the Court is prepared to revisit—and possibly overturn—a 1935 ruling that limited presidential authority over the FTC and similar commissions.

Trump had removed Ms. Slaughter, a Democratic commissioner, earlier this year, contending that the statutory protections shielding her from removal without cause infringed on the president’s constitutional duty to ensure faithful execution of the laws. …

Nothing in or about government is non-political. Every agency or department gets filled with government supporting processors.

They are not paid for independent thought.

AI will free us from many of them.

I had never dared imagine that these “independent” agencies, which are abhorrent to the Constitution would ever face any challenges during my lifetime. I am beyond pleased to find that I was wrong about that.

True, it’s not the total elimination of these unconstitutional “4th branch” agencies that I’d prefer, but any weakening of their power and independence is a good thing.

One one more thing. The media, and the liberal establishment have been busy just outright lying about what “Humphrey’s Executor” actually says. Which was, that a principal officer might well be entitled to lost wages, but it never held that he would be entitled to the exercise of power that the office represents. That, right there, is CRAZY. It’s no different than the old European and English ideas about hereditary nobility, and the offices and estates they held, as property, which could even be inherited.

How, in a republic, could there ever be a vested property interest in any sort of public office? How could an individual have a “right” to hold a public office, contrary to the desires of the source of that office’s authority (in this case, Article II of the constitution which vests ALL of the executive power in the person of an elected president.)

Trump has awakened the idea that the entire unconstitutional edifice of these terrible independent agencies might someday be toppled and replaced with the republican government the constitution guarantees to all of us.

90 years later...our Republic is stable but its working have evolved. The President is no longer JUST the CIC...he plays a hand in every move the government makes.....the Judicial Branch excepted.

I think Humphrey will be overturned.....there being no such thing as a TOTALLY Independent agency.

I'm just tossing this around in my head.

All of them.

They violate the separation of powers, a key protection of liberty, and we’ve seen the damage they do.

They violate the constitution, and were deliberately structured to evade the political control of the American people.

The only reason that they weren’t killed in their infancy is that FDR threatened to pack the court to get the results that he wanted. We’ve been living with the consequences ever since.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.