Supreme Court Allows Trump To Fire Sole
Democrat On FTC
Deadline,
by
Ted Johnson
Original Article
Posted By: Dreadnought,
9/22/2025 6:34:51 PM
The Supreme Court cleared the way for Donald Trump to fire the sole Democrat on the Federal Trade Commission, raising doubt about a long-standing precedent that has limited the president’s power over independent agencies.
In its ruling, the high court set the question of whether Trump could fire the commissioners for oral arguments in December, and whether a 1935 decision, Humphrey’s Executor vs. United States, should be overruled. The court also granted a stay that will allow Trump to dismiss the commissioner in the meantime.
Post Reply
Reminder: “WE ARE A SALON AND NOT A SALOON”
Your thoughts, comments, and ideas are always welcome here. But we ask you to please be mindful and respectful. Threatening or crude language doesn't persuade anybody and makes the conversation less enjoyable for fellow L.Dotters.
Reply 1 - Posted by:
RobertJ984 9/22/2025 6:37:38 PM (No. 2007558)
No! The Supreme Court isn't "allowing" Trump to do it, the Supreme Court says he has the AUTHORITY to do it!!
57 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
DVC 9/22/2025 7:18:27 PM (No. 2007583)
"Court allows NORMAL presidential powers to continue."
42 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
gramma b 9/22/2025 7:31:28 PM (No. 2007591)
He's dismissing her "for cause," because she's a crook. Not because she's a Democrat. But those are often synonymous.
42 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
gramma b 9/22/2025 7:33:42 PM (No. 2007593)
Ignore #3. I didn't pay close enough attention. Wrong agency.
16 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
jeffkinnh 9/22/2025 9:09:30 PM (No. 2007612)
An expected response from SCOTUS and from the 3 liberals.
Of course the dissent from Kagan is as expected, that the President doesn't have the authority to dismiss members of certain "protected" agencies because they were set up by Congress to be protected. Her statement is that the President "may thereby extinguish the agencies’ bipartisanship and independence.".
But Kagan doesn't get the argument against her thinking. The Constitution states the President is THE Chief Executive and in full charge of the Executive Branch as defined in the Constitution. The ONLY way that Executive authority could be removed would be through a Constitutional amendment. That means the laws limiting Presidential control over these agencies are unconstitutional. There is no such thing as "independence" from Presidential authority, no matter how much "good" liberals claim would come from it.
When you think about it, it is ridiculous to think that agencies and people in agencies existing before a President is elected, by a majority of the voters, should be able to resist the President's efforts to run the country as he sees fit and in accordance with the Constitution and law.
And, this is not unlimited power, as bleated by the Left. The Executive exists within a specific legal framework. There is a lot of wiggle room in that framework and that has been utilized by every President. But it still is a limited framework. An example is the policing that has been done in DC, where the President has some dispensation to act, but not as much in other cities. Certainly, Trump has talked about doing this but it is more to shine a spotlight on the failure of liberal governance and to make them sound like idiots as they defend high violence rates in their cities.
The scope of Presidential power can be scary but it is also essential to the running of the country. That's why the Constitution defined it so clearly and so broadly. If it's a piece of the Executive branch, it's under the President's control. Period.
22 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
JimBob 9/22/2025 10:47:58 PM (No. 2007637)
Reading the article, I cannot help but think that 'there is another side to the story'.
1 person likes this.
One of these years (probably not 2028, but '32? 36? - it's simply a matter of time), the dems are going to take back the White House and things are going to get very ugly when that happens.
8 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
Californian 9/23/2025 12:05:56 AM (No. 2007652)
There is no such thing as an independent agency. The constitution does not allow for such a thing and Congress can't make up their own version of the constitution.
Congress writes the laws and have power of the purse.
President is chief executive and enforces the law.
Supreme Court interprets the law.
There's no magical fourth branch of independent agencies. There was no doubt how this should have played out.
12 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
Strike3 9/23/2025 8:14:57 AM (No. 2007738)
"NORMAL" is in our rear-view mirror but they set a precedent by allowing the Kenyan to do as he pleased, inluding the destruction of a barely functioning health care system by replacing it with socialized medicine. They had no idea what Biden and Otto Penn were doing but they "allowed" that as well.
6 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
Rumblehog 9/23/2025 8:38:52 AM (No. 2007756)
There’s no such thing as an, “independent agency.” We have THREE branches of government. Congress can’t legislate a fourth without the constitutional amendment process. Liberals were clever to threaten past GOP presidents to obey these, “Hands off!” type of Rules/Traditions/Agreements, but there is NO basis in constitutional law to require them.
In other words, when the leftists “clutch their pearls” over something the President will do, that’s when it’s time to grab the pearls an yank real hard, sending them flying all over hither and yon.
6 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
EQKimball 9/23/2025 11:45:07 AM (No. 2007850)
After almost every presidential election, one or two U.S. Attorneys refuse to leave until they are booted. The Office of Presidential Personnel should require all presidential appointees to sign an acknowledgement that, as employees of the Executive Branch, they understand and agree that they serve at the pleasure of the President and may be relieved without cause.
1 person likes this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
danu 9/23/2025 4:22:33 PM (No. 2007958)
agree w/ --1--and -10-
0 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
Omen55 9/23/2025 4:59:50 PM (No. 2007973)
Anyone in the Executive Branch can be fired by POTUS.
0 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Dreadnought"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)