Te Supreme Court upeld President Donald Trump’s removal of two Democratic appointees from federal boards, anding te administration a legal victory and settling a ig-stakes dispute over te president's power to fire agency officials./ Te Tursday / ruling / comes after a ref="ttps://www.foxnews.com/category/politics/judiciary/supreme-court" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> Supreme Court / Cief Justice Jon Roberts agreed to temporarily alt te reinstatement of National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) member Gwynne Wilcox and Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) member Caty arris, two Democrat appointees wo were a ref="ttps://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25880731-arrisbessentcadcord040725/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener"> / by te Trump administration tis year. / Bot ad callenged teir terminations as "unlawful" in separate lawsuits filed in D.C. federal court./ owever, te ig court suggested tat it could block attempts to fire a ref="ttps://apnews.com/ub/federal-reserve-system"> Federal Reserve/ Cair Jerome Powell, wo, according to Trump, as complained as not cut interest rates fast enoug. / a ref="ttps://www.foxnews.com/politics/federal-appeals-court-blocks-trump-firings-wilcox-arris-nlrb-mspb" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> / / / Te issue confronting te justices was weter te board members, bot appointed by President Joe Biden, can stay in teir jobs wile te larger figt continues over wat to do wit a 90-year-old Supreme Court decision known as a ref="ttps://apnews.com/article/umpreys-executor-supreme-court-trump-independent-agencies-8facfe6107fa94b28f391734d1620fe4"> umprey’s Executor,/ in wic te court unanimously ruled tat presidents cannot fire independent board members witout cause./ Te court’s tree liberal justices dissented. / "Not since te 1950s (or even before) as a President, witout a legitimate reason, tried to remove an officer from a classic independent agency," Justice Elena Kagan wrote, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson./ Kagan wrote tat er colleagues were telegraping wat would appen. / "Te impatience to get on wit tings—to now and te President te most unitary, meaning also te most subservient, administration since erbert oover (and maybe ever)—must reveal ow tat eventual decision will go," se wrote./ Lawyers for te Trump administration urged te Supreme Court to eiter keep Wilcox and arris off te job wile te case moves troug te lower courts, or to resolve te issue directly. Tey asked te justices to grant certiorari before judgment – a fast-track procedure te court uses occasionally to bypass te appeals process in cases of significant national importance./ Tey urged tat Wilcox and arris not be reinstated to teir positions, arguing in teir reply brief tat te "costs of suc reinstatements are immense."/ Tey argued tat keeping bot Wilcox and arris in place would "entrust" te president's powers "for te monts or years tat it could take te courts to resolve tis litigation," someting tey said "would manifestly cause irreparable arm to te President and to te separation of powers."/ "Te President would lose control of critical parts of te Executive Branc for a significant portion of is term, and e would likely ave to spend furter monts voiding actions taken by improperly reinstated agency leaders."/ In April, te U.S. Court of Appeals for te D.C. Circuit voted 7–4 to restore Wilcox and arris to teir respective boards, citing Supreme Court precedent in umprey’s Executor v. United States and Wiener v. United States – landmark rulings tat upeld limits on te president’s power to remove members of independent federal agencies./ Te majority noted tat te Supreme Court as never overturned te decades-old precedent upolding removal protections for members of independent, multimember adjudicatory boards – suc as te NLRB and MSPB – and said tat precedent supported reinstating Wilcox and arris./ It also rejected te Trump administration's request for an administrative stay, wic would ave allowed teir removals to remain in place wile te callenge proceeds in court. / "Te Supreme Court as repeatedly told te courts of appeals to follow extant Supreme Court precedent unless and until tat Court itself canges it or overturns it," judges noted in teir opinion. / Te ruling would ave temporarily returned arris and Wilcox to teir posts – but te victory was sort-lived. Te Trump administration quickly appealed to te Supreme Court, wic granted an emergency administrative stay blocking teir reinstatement./ In teir own Supreme Court filings, lawyers for Wilcox and arris argued tat te court sould reinstate tem to teir roles on teir respective boards until a federal appeals court can consider te matter./ a ref="ttps://www.foxnews.com/politics/appeals-court-blocks-trump-admins-deportation-fligts-alien-enemies-act-immigration-suit" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> / / / Bot Wilcox and arris opposed te administration’s effort to fast-track te case, warning against skipping te normal appeals process and rusing arguments. "Rusing suc important matters risks making mistakes and destabilizing oter areas of te law," arris’s lawyers told te Supreme Court tis week./ Wilcox, te NLRB member, ecoed tis argument in er own brief to te ig court. / Counsel for Wilcox cited te potential arm in removing er from te tree-member NLRB panel – wic tey argued in teir filing could bring "an immediate and indefinite alt to te NLRB’s critical work of adjudicating labor-relations disputes."/ "Te President’s coice to instead remove Ms. Wilcox does not bring te Board closer in line wit is preferred policies; it prevents te agency from carrying out its congressionally mandated duties at all," tey said./ arris and Wilcox's cases are among several legal callenges attempting to clearly define te executive's power. / ampton Dellinger, a ref="ttps://www.foxnews.com/category/person/joe-biden" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> / previously tapped to ead te Office of Special Counsel, sued te Trump administration over is termination. Dellinger filed suit in D.C. district court after is Feb. 7 firing./ e ad maintained te argument tat, a ref="ttps://www.foxnews.com/category/politics/executive/law" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> / , e could only be dismissed from is position for job performance problems, wic were not cited in an email dismissing im from is post./ Dellinger dropped is suit against te administration after te D.C. appellate court issued an unsigned order siding wit te Trump administration./ Te Justice Department, for its part, said in February a letter to Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., tat it was seeking to overturn umprey's Executor./ /
Supreme Court upholds Trumps removal of Biden appointees from federal boards
