US Supreme Court poised to hand Trump a rare defeat over Federal Reserve control
The US Supreme Court appears on track to deliver a rare rebuke to President Donald Trump, handing him a loss in his attempt to exert greater control over the Federal Reserve.
The high court's Republican majority has long been understood to believe that the president has broad authority to fire employees at federal agencies. However, in May of last year, they sent a significant signal that the Fed is not subject to the same rules as other executive branch departments.
In the 2025 case Trump v. Wilcox, the Court ruled that the Federal Reserve's leadership is exempt from presidential control because it operates independently and has a unique history dating back to the First and Second Banks of the United States.
At a recent oral argument in the new case, Trump v. Cook, most justices signaled their intention to uphold this ruling, suggesting they will reject Trump’s attempts to remove Fed governors from office for even minor infractions. While Justice Samuel Alito asked some tough questions about Trump's claims, it seems unlikely that he and his fellow Republicans would join a majority of Democrats and Chief Justice John Roberts in opposing the president.
The Federal Reserve plays a crucial role in setting interest rates that can significantly impact the economy. If left unchecked by the president, these decisions could lead to a temporary economic boost followed by damaging inflation down the road.
Legislators have long shielded the Fed's governors from presidential control by limiting the president’s ability to fire them "for cause." This helps ensure that Fed officials are not influenced by short-term political considerations and can make independent decisions about monetary policy. The Court has previously recognized the importance of preserving the independence of the Federal Reserve in order to maintain economic stability.
In Trump's attempt to bypass this law, he claimed that a minor discrepancy on Cook’s mortgage application justified firing her from her position at the Fed. However, it appears that the president never provided any substantial evidence to support his claims and did not grant Cook a hearing before making her removal official.
During oral arguments, several justices expressed skepticism about Trump's attempts to remove Cook, particularly in light of the fact that even minor paperwork errors can occur when filing mortgage documents. Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett both warned against allowing presidents to use their power to fire Fed governors based on minor infractions, saying it would undermine the independence of the Federal Reserve.
The Court's handling of this case has significant implications for future attempts by presidents to exert control over the Fed. Even if most justices are unlikely to reject Trump's efforts entirely, they will likely uphold some form of protection for the Fed's governors from presidential interference.
Ultimately, it remains to be seen what exact ruling the Supreme Court will hand down in Cook v. Trump. However, even a narrow decision keeping Cook on the Fed’s board could still serve as a significant rebuke to Trump and help ensure the independence of the Federal Reserve.
The US Supreme Court appears on track to deliver a rare rebuke to President Donald Trump, handing him a loss in his attempt to exert greater control over the Federal Reserve.
The high court's Republican majority has long been understood to believe that the president has broad authority to fire employees at federal agencies. However, in May of last year, they sent a significant signal that the Fed is not subject to the same rules as other executive branch departments.
In the 2025 case Trump v. Wilcox, the Court ruled that the Federal Reserve's leadership is exempt from presidential control because it operates independently and has a unique history dating back to the First and Second Banks of the United States.
At a recent oral argument in the new case, Trump v. Cook, most justices signaled their intention to uphold this ruling, suggesting they will reject Trump’s attempts to remove Fed governors from office for even minor infractions. While Justice Samuel Alito asked some tough questions about Trump's claims, it seems unlikely that he and his fellow Republicans would join a majority of Democrats and Chief Justice John Roberts in opposing the president.
The Federal Reserve plays a crucial role in setting interest rates that can significantly impact the economy. If left unchecked by the president, these decisions could lead to a temporary economic boost followed by damaging inflation down the road.
Legislators have long shielded the Fed's governors from presidential control by limiting the president’s ability to fire them "for cause." This helps ensure that Fed officials are not influenced by short-term political considerations and can make independent decisions about monetary policy. The Court has previously recognized the importance of preserving the independence of the Federal Reserve in order to maintain economic stability.
In Trump's attempt to bypass this law, he claimed that a minor discrepancy on Cook’s mortgage application justified firing her from her position at the Fed. However, it appears that the president never provided any substantial evidence to support his claims and did not grant Cook a hearing before making her removal official.
During oral arguments, several justices expressed skepticism about Trump's attempts to remove Cook, particularly in light of the fact that even minor paperwork errors can occur when filing mortgage documents. Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett both warned against allowing presidents to use their power to fire Fed governors based on minor infractions, saying it would undermine the independence of the Federal Reserve.
The Court's handling of this case has significant implications for future attempts by presidents to exert control over the Fed. Even if most justices are unlikely to reject Trump's efforts entirely, they will likely uphold some form of protection for the Fed's governors from presidential interference.
Ultimately, it remains to be seen what exact ruling the Supreme Court will hand down in Cook v. Trump. However, even a narrow decision keeping Cook on the Fed’s board could still serve as a significant rebuke to Trump and help ensure the independence of the Federal Reserve.
, i was expecting trump to win this one for sure but it looks like the court is gonna stand up for the fed's independence 
, i mean can you imagine if presidents could just fire ppl from the fed without cause? that would be a huge mistake in my opinion 
, the economy needs stability and the fed plays a big role in that. plus, it's not like trump didn't have enough ammo to try to get rid of wilcox last year... idk what's going on with this guy 
. I mean, who wants their personal financial drama playing out in front of the entire nation? And can you imagine if every Fed governor had to be fired just because they made a minor mistake on a mortgage application? 
It's like, calm down, Donald, we get it, mistakes happen.
It's going to be interesting to see how this all plays out, but for now, I'm just here for the popcorn – and hoping that the Court keeps the Fed governors safe from Trump's wrath 
they got their whole lives to mess with the economy, cant we just let them do it? I mean, the Fed's been around since like 1791 and all... its kinda cool that they get to keep doing their own thing. But at the same time, its kinda scary when you think about Trump trying to fire people from the Fed for no reason 
. The fact that most justices are trying to protect them is a good thing imo 
like, who knows how that'll play out in 2025? 
.
and hand him a rare defeat over the Feds control 
i mean we all know how much trump loves his 15 minutes of fame and trying to flex his muscles on social media 
but this time he got caught and now hes getting served 
the fact that the justices are willing to stand up for the Fed's independence is like a breath of fresh air 
especially after years of watching them do nothing about trump's shady dealings 
.
.
.
. I mean, come on, dude – if you're gonna try to fire someone, at least have the guts to provide some actual evidence 
. It's about time we saw some accountability from Trump and his administration 
- it's just not gonna work. The Supreme Court is sending a clear message that the Fed needs its independence, especially when it comes to setting interest rates. It's like they're saying, "Sorry, Don't Look Up" to Trump's claims of control 
. And with most justices signaling their intention to uphold the previous ruling, it seems like the Fed is safe from presidential interference... for now 
. Anyway, one thing's for sure: the Supreme Court is keeping an eye on the Fed, and that's good news for the economy