Why the Supreme Court decision on firing independent agency heads is a big deal - Don Moynihan

[muriel_volestrangler]

2. Mark Joseph Stern on BlueSky:

BREAKING: The Supreme Court just effectively overruled 90 years of precedent on the shadow docket, greenlighting Trump's firing of multi-member agency leaders while their cases are pending—despite Congress' effort to protect them against removal. A huge decision.

The Supreme Court goes out of its way to say that its order today does NOT allow Trump to remove members of the Federal Reserve because it is "uniquely structured" and has a "distinct history tradition." (I do not think those distinctions hold water.)

Kagan's dissent is scorching and worth reading in full. She calls out the majority for effectively overruling Humphrey's Executor on the shadow docket and allowing Trump to break the law without even awaiting the Supreme Court's permission. She is alarmed.

BTW the historical basis for the "unitary executive theory" that the Supreme Court embraced today is total bunk, just an egregious, bad-faith misreading of history. It's pure bullshit. A court with integrity would acknowledge its mistake instead of doubling down.

BTW the historical basis for the "unitary executive theory" that the Supreme Court embraced today is total bunk, just an egregious, bad-faith misreading of history. It's pure bullshit. A court with integrity would acknowledge its mistake instead of doubling down. ndlawreview.org/interring-th...

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjsdc.bsky.social) 2025-05-22T21:25:43.629Z

Lawyers, Guns & Money blog:

Overruling 90 years of precedent (except for the Fed ) in an unreasoned four-paragraph opinion for Daddy Trump

To elaborate on Paul’s post below, the Court today overruled the Court’s unanimous 1935 opinion holding that Congress can require that members of executive agencies it creates to be fired only for cause sub silentio. (Literally — as Kagan observes the Court’s opinion does not even cite the controlling precedent.) The Court’s apparent new rule is indeed just royalism, essentially proceeding as if Congress has no interests worth even being considered:
...
As Kagan says, a major tell in the opinion is that it sees the only competing interest belonging to the officers themselves, ignoring the strong interest the people and their representatives have in having their statutorily expressed will honored

https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2025/05/overruling-90-years-of-precedent-except-for-the-fed-in-an-unreasoned-four-paragraph-opinion-for-daddy-trump