Supreme Court boosts Trump’s firing power but blocks key tariff moves
Supreme Court expands Trump's authority to fire independent agency heads but blocks tariff powers.
Why it matters: These rulings reshape executive power and signal complex legal battles over economic regulation and federal agency control, critical for legal professionals tracking constitutional law.
- On June 29, 2026, the Court ruled 6-3 that Trump can fire heads of independent agencies like the FTC without cause.
- The Court maintained Federal Reserve independence, blocking Trump’s attempt to remove Fed Governor Lisa Cook in a 5-4 decision.
- In February 2026, the Court ruled 6-3 that Trump exceeded authority under IEEPA by imposing tariffs without clear congressional approval.
- Chief Justice Roberts emphasized that imposing tariffs requires explicit authorization from Congress, limiting unilateral executive actions.
On June 29, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling expanding presidential powers by overturning the 1935 precedent set by Humphrey's Executor. The Court ruled 6-3 that President Trump has broad authority to fire heads of independent federal agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) without needing to provide cause. This ruling confirmed the legality of Trump's firing of Democratic FTC appointees Rebecca Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya. Chief Justice John Roberts stated, "If anything more is left of Humphrey's, we overrule it." Axios reports.
However, the Court carved out an exception for the Federal Reserve. In a narrow 5-4 decision, justices protected Fed Governor Lisa Cook from immediate removal by the president. Cook faced mortgage fraud allegations predating her Fed tenure, which she denied, claiming political motivations behind Trump's removal attempt. This exception underscores the Fed’s unique role in economic stability. Detailed coverage is found in AP News.
Separately, the Court further limited Trump's economic policy powers in February 2026 by ruling 6-3 that his unilateral imposition of tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) exceeded presidential authority. The Court emphasized that IEEPA does not grant the president power to impose tariffs without clear congressional authorization. Chief Justice Roberts remarked, "The President asserts the extraordinary power to unilaterally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration, and scope... he must identify clear congressional authorization to exercise it." This decision puts a check on executive authority in economic regulation, as detailed by PolitiFact.
Collectively, these rulings shift the balance of power between the president and independent regulatory bodies. They permit greater presidential influence over federal agencies but maintain critical economic governance mechanisms like the Federal Reserve’s independence. The restriction on tariff authority also signals legal complexities around executive economic actions. Legal professionals should watch for ensuing challenges and implications on government operations and market regulation.
By the numbers:
- 6-3 — Court ruling expanding Trump’s power to fire independent agency heads
- 5-4 — Decision protecting Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook from immediate removal
- 6-3 — Ruling blocking Trump’s unilateral tariffs under IEEPA
Yes, but: The Court preserved the Federal Reserve's independence despite broad expansion of presidential firing power, highlighting limits to executive control.
What's next: Legal battles are expected over the scope of presidential power in economic policy and regulatory agency oversight following these rulings.