Kate Shaw

So, OK, the question of Wray getting fired is now moot, but the question remains as to other officials, members of what we think of as independent agencies like the Federal Trade Commission or the Federal Reserve, who both by tradition and by law have more independence from the president than, say, the secretary of defense or another member of the cabinet.

So, Jillian, can you start by talking about what the older Supreme Court cases have to say about that?

So, Jillian, can you start by talking about what the older Supreme Court cases have to say about that?

Okay, so we have, through these cases and some others, a pretty well-settled understanding that, at least as to some positions, Congress can decide that there are reasons to give officials a degree of independence from the president, and one way of doing that is to place limits on the president's ability to fire those officials.

Okay, so we have, through these cases and some others, a pretty well-settled understanding that, at least as to some positions, Congress can decide that there are reasons to give officials a degree of independence from the president, and one way of doing that is to place limits on the president's ability to fire those officials.

And then, around 15 years ago, the Roberts Court begins to really cut back on that reasoning. Tell me about those cases.

And then, around 15 years ago, the Roberts Court begins to really cut back on that reasoning. Tell me about those cases.

So as you're describing the reasoning in those cases, what do you make of the reasoning?

So as you're describing the reasoning in those cases, what do you make of the reasoning?

So let's make the question concrete in the context of the Federal Reserve. So the Federal Reserve's members have statutory protections against presidential removal except for cause. During his first term, Trump apparently considered trying to demote or even to fire Fed Chair Jerome Powell, but he never did.

So let's make the question concrete in the context of the Federal Reserve. So the Federal Reserve's members have statutory protections against presidential removal except for cause. During his first term, Trump apparently considered trying to demote or even to fire Fed Chair Jerome Powell, but he never did.

And Biden renominated Powell to another four-year term as chair, and that term isn't up until 2026. So in a recent interview on NBC, Trump suggested he wouldn't try to remove Powell, but he's changed his mind before. So if he did, and if Powell did not just engage in this kind of anticipatory compliance the way it seems that Wray is doing, would the law permit that?

And Biden renominated Powell to another four-year term as chair, and that term isn't up until 2026. So in a recent interview on NBC, Trump suggested he wouldn't try to remove Powell, but he's changed his mind before. So if he did, and if Powell did not just engage in this kind of anticipatory compliance the way it seems that Wray is doing, would the law permit that?

Well, there are really two questions here.

Well, there are really two questions here.

And just to make it clear, so maybe as a matter of statutory interpretation, before we get to the Constitution, Trump could demote Powell back to being a regular governor. But the text of the statute isn't unclear or ambiguous as to the 14-year term, right? Firing somebody... chair or not chair, would clearly violate the statute.

And just to make it clear, so maybe as a matter of statutory interpretation, before we get to the Constitution, Trump could demote Powell back to being a regular governor. But the text of the statute isn't unclear or ambiguous as to the 14-year term, right? Firing somebody... chair or not chair, would clearly violate the statute.

Okay, but so you said there's a statutory question, and what about the Constitution?

Okay, but so you said there's a statutory question, and what about the Constitution?

So in some ways, I think what is most striking about this conversation is that we are having it at all, right?