President Donald Trump is pressing ahead with his effort to force Lisa Cook off the Federal Reserve board, following a Supreme Court decision Monday that temporarily blocked his removal of the governor but left the door open for future action.
In a post on Truth Social, Trump seized on the high court's narrow ruling, noting that the justices “sent back” the case to a lower court “on a strictly procedural basis.” He declared his administration “will take appropriate action immediately to make sure that someone who has committed wrongdoing will not be making vital decisions” for the U.S. economy.
The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that Cook can remain on the central bank's board of governors while her legal challenge to Trump's attempted firing plays out. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the court's three liberal justices in the majority, while Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett dissented.
Trump first moved to remove Cook for cause last August, after Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte issued a referral alleging she had improperly designated properties in Michigan and Georgia as primary residences for financial gain. Cook has not been criminally charged and has denied any wrongdoing. The attempt marks the first time a president has tried to fire a Fed board member in the institution's 112-year history.
Cook, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, has argued that Trump's effort to oust her stems from his displeasure with the Fed's decision not to lower interest rates sooner last year. The case has become a flashpoint in the broader debate over presidential power and the independence of federal agencies.
In his majority opinion, Roberts wrote that whether the president can remove Cook “will depend in part on the underlying facts” of the case. “In this opinion, we have not addressed the facts, as they have yet to be found or analyzed under the relevant legal standards,” Roberts added. “Rather, we have simply addressed the parties’ arguments about the appropriate legal standards under which the facts must be evaluated.”
Justice Thomas, in a dissent joined by the other conservative justices, argued that if the Supreme Court prefers an “independent” Fed board, its issue is “not with the President,” but with the Constitution. “Regardless of whether unaccountable executive officers like Cook would better govern the economy, the Framers rejected such a ‘promised land of technocratic governance,’” Thomas wrote. “They instead chose government by the people. As a court, our duty is not to second-guess that decision, but to uphold it.”
The ruling comes amid a series of Supreme Court decisions reshaping the balance of power between the presidency and independent agencies. In a separate case last term, the Court gave Trump sweeping authority to fire officials from independent agencies, a precedent that could bolster his argument in Cook's case. Meanwhile, Justice Sonia Sotomayor has warned that expanding presidential firing power could “unleash chaos” across the federal government.
As the legal battle moves back to lower courts, Trump's renewed call to remove Cook signals that the fight over the Fed's independence is far from over. The outcome could have significant implications for the central bank's ability to set monetary policy free from political pressure.
