The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that presidents have expanded authority to fire officials at independent federal agencies [1].

This decision alters the balance of power between the executive branch and regulatory bodies. By removing protections for agency heads, the ruling allows the president to exert more direct control over the federal bureaucracy.

The court backed the firing of a Democratic member of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) [2]. In doing so, the justices overturned a precedent from 1935 [3] that had previously limited the president's ability to remove heads of independent agencies at will.

However, the court did not grant the executive branch total control. The justices rejected an attempt by President Donald Trump to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook [1]. The ruling explicitly bars the president from removing Cook, thereby preserving a layer of independence for the U.S. central bank [1].

The decision has drawn sharp criticism from some members of the court. Justice Sonia Sotomayor said, "the court gives the president a power unknown even to the English crown" [4].

The ruling arrived on June 29, 2026 [1]. It establishes a new legal framework for how independent agencies operate, though the Federal Reserve remains a notable exception to this expanded presidential reach [1].

“The court gives the president a power unknown even to the English crown”

This ruling signals a significant shift in administrative law by dismantling nearly a century of precedent that shielded regulators from political interference. While the court protected the Federal Reserve to prevent political volatility in monetary policy, the broader expansion of removal powers means other independent agencies may now operate as direct extensions of the White House.