Where this was said
Pending Cases: Federal Reserve Independence and Independent Agencies
At 47:22 · chapter starts 44:00
Two pending cases test the limits of presidential removal power. The first asks whether the president can fire commissioners of independent multi-member agencies — the FTC, SEC, EEOC, NLRB — despite a nearly century-old precedent (Humphrey's Executor) limiting that power. The Supreme Court already signaled it would adopt the unitary executive theory, but carved out a bespoke exception for the Federal Reserve because applying the theory there would allow the president to blow up the global economy [1] — Leah Litman "The Supreme Court adopted the unitary executive theory giving Trump sweeping power to fire agency heads — then added a bespoke carve-out fo…" 45:00 . Trump immediately tested the exception by attempting to fire a Fed governor. The second case (the Lisa Cook case) asks whether Trump violated the existing statutory limits on firing Fed governors — a narrower question than the sweeping agency one. Leah emphasizes that if the larger case goes against independent agencies, it gives the president power to install loyalists at the FTC, SEC, and beyond — using regulatory power to reward friends and punish enemies.
The Supreme Court adopted the unitary executive theory giving Trump sweeping power to fire agency heads — then added a bespoke carve-out for the Federal Reserve because otherwise the president could blow up the global economy. Trump immediately tried to fire a Fed governor anyway.
The Supreme Court carved out a special exception for the Federal Reserve from its new unitary executive theory, illustrating the theory's catastrophic implications for the global economy.
Leah Litman expects the six Republican-appointed justices to uphold state bans on trans athletes, but the real danger is a ruling that Title IX not only permits but requires such bans — or an equal protection holding stripping trans people of meaningful judicial scrutiny in any context.
