SUPREME COURT RECONSIDERS PRECEDENT: The Supreme Court is set to reevaluate its own 90-year precedent in a case on whether President Trump has the power to fire a member of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) without cause.
The court will hear arguments Monday on whether Trump can fire FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter, a Democrat who has served on the commission since 2018. Trump tried to fire her from the commission on the grounds that her service was “inconsistent” with the administration’s policies.
But the court’s 1935 ruling in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States protects officers of federal agencies from being fired by the president without cause. The court's ultimate decision will determine whether the precedent will hold, and it could have implications for other federal agencies beyond the FTC, The Hill’s Ella Lee and Zach Schonfeld report.
Trump has fired about a dozen officials other than Slaughter despite federal law protecting them as well, leading some to sue.
Lower courts have mostly ruled against the president, but Trump administration lawyers are hoping the conservative-majority Supreme Court will overrule them.
Some justices have already shown an interest in overturning Humphrey’s Executor.
“The decision in Humphrey’s Executor poses a direct threat to our constitutional structure and, as a result, the liberty of the American people,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in a 2020 opinion that was joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch.
Slaughter’s case comes before the high court the month before another case on Trump’s attempt to fire Lisa Cook from the Federal Reserve’s board of governors, citing allegations of mortgage fraud against her. Cook has denied the allegations.
My colleagues Schonfeld and Lee report that the court has so far been more deferential to the Fed’s independence than what is expected to come for other federal agencies. But the arguments there will also be indicative of where the court is leaning in their considerations of the president’s authority over the wide-ranging federal agencies.
▪ The Hill: Court to decide if Trump can restrict birthright citizenship.
▪ CNN: John Roberts, Elena Kagan to battle on executive power.
HEGSETH SEEING CLEARER WATER: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth may not be out of the woods on the controversy surrounding the multiple strikes on a boat in the Caribbean in September, but his role seems to be in less danger than it was just a week ago.
The Hill’s Niall Stanage reports the key moment came when Navy Adm. Frank Bradley reportedly denied to lawmakers during a briefing Thursday that Hegseth issued an order to “kill everybody” aboard the alleged drug-smuggling vessel sunk on Sept. 2.
The Washington Post reported late last month that Hegseth issued the order verbally, leading Bradley to order a second strike on two survivors who were clinging to the boat’s wreckage, killing them.
But Republican and Democratic members of Congress who were briefed by Bradley both said the admiral clearly pushed back on the idea that he received any such order from Hegseth. That should help give Hegseth some room to go after those who have been critical of him, Stanage writes.
Still, the story isn't going away anytime soon. Critics have called for the public release of the video of the second strike, and one Democrat who saw it said it was “deeply disturbing.”
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has called for Hegseth to testify about the incident. But most Republicans haven’t put too much pressure on the Pentagon chief, who still has the backing of the president.
▪ The Hill: Hegseth doesn’t commit to releasing boat strike video.
▪ CNN: Boat sank in double-tap strike was heading to Suriname.
WALZ FACES SCRUTINY: Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) is facing a political firestorm over a growing scandal concerning allegations of fraud in a federally funded nutrition program.
Nearly 60 people have already been convicted of charges connected to schemes to set up companies that billed state agencies for millions of dollars in social services that were never provided, The New York Times reported. The money was stolen from a program designed to keep children fed during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Trump has gone on offense after the Somali American community, as some of those who were allegedly responsible for setting up the companies are Somali. But the situation has also created some difficulties for Walz as he gears up to run for a third term as governor.
The controversy has led even some of Walz’s allies to question whether he should seek another term, The Hill’s Amie Parnes reports.
Critics point out that the widespread fraud was able to happen on Walz's watch. But some some analysts said they don’t believe the controversy is fatal for his political career. Walz has also been seen as a possible 2028 presidential candidate after serving as former Vice President Kamala Harris’s running mate last year.
Walz’s office has emphasized the work he has done to combat fraud, and allies believe Trump’s rising feud with Walz will only help him. But the Republican candidates lining up to challenge him seem ready to go on the attack.
▪ CBS News: What to know about the Minnesota fraud allegations.
