Updates to our Terms of Use

We are updating our Terms of Use. Please carefully review the updated Terms before proceeding to our website.

Wednesday, April 23, 2025

View Back issues

Trump asks Supreme Court to toss Fed governor 

An appeals court rejected the president’s request to sack Lisa Cook earlier this week, but the White House has had better odds at winning emergency appeals at the Supreme Court.

WASHINGTON (CN) — President Donald Trump asked the Supreme Court on Thursday for permission to remove Federal Reserve member Lisa Cook from the board of governors as he seeks greater control over the nation’s central bank.

“This application involves yet another case of improper judicial interference with the president’s removal authority — here, interference with the president’s authority to remove members of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors for cause,” U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer wrote in the emergency appeal.

The high court has sided with Trump in multiple firings of independent regulatory board members in recent months, despite a 90-year-old precedent shielding them from presidential interference. Trump has used unsubstantiated claims of mortgage fraud to justify Cook’s termination.

A federal judge blocked Cook’s removal from the board while litigation continues on the legality of her termination. Earlier this week, a three-judge panel on the D.C. Circuit refused an emergency stay request, which would have allowed the government to force Cook out.

The administration said Cook claimed properties in both Michigan and Georgia as her principal residence in mortgage agreements. Lenders typically offer lower interest rates for principal-residence mortgages.

Cook denies the accusation, and the Justice Department has yet to file any charges against her. Subsequent reporting further questioned the administration’s claims, unveiling documents where Cook described her Atlanta property as a vacation home.

Cook filed the 24-page suit in District of Columbia federal court on Aug. 28, setting up a significant legal battle over what has long been deemed a red line in the president’s ability to terminate political appointees.

Cook argues that the only causes for removal are inefficiency, neglect of duty, malfeasance in office or comparable misconduct. She says immediately firing her violated her due process rights.

U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb, a Joe Biden appointee, found that Cook made a strong showing that her removal violated the Federal Reserve Act’s “for cause” provision.

The best reading of the provision, Cobb said, is that Trump’s claims of mortgage fraud from June and July 2021 would not amount to grounds for removal as the actions occurred before the Senate confirmed her in January 2022.

A governor can only be removed based on their conduct in office and whether they have been “faithfully and effectively executing their statutory duties,” Cobb said.

Further, Trump’s attempted removal likely violated Cook’s Fifth Amendment due process rights and would irreparably harm Cook and the public interest, Cobb ruled.

At the D.C. Circuit, U.S. Circuit Judge Bradley Garcia and U.S. Circuit Judge Michelle Childs — both Biden appointees — said the government failed to provide Cook with any meaningful opportunity to respond to the accusations against her.

Trump told the Supreme Court that due process was a “flexible concept.”

“The lower courts’ due-process theory would invite judicial micromanagement of the president’s exercise of his core Article II powers — even where, as here, courts have no authority to review the substance of the president’s ultimate decision,” Sauer wrote. “Regardless, due process is a flexible concept; whatever process is due to principal officers was provided here.”

Cook participated in the Federal Reserve meeting this week, where she voted to lower interest rates by a quarter percent — a move Trump has been pushing for over the last few months. However, Trump said Cook could not be trusted to wield the vast powers of the board.

“Put simply, the president may reasonably determine that interest rates paid by the American people should not be set by a governor who appears to have lied about facts material to the interest rates she secured for herself — and refuses to explain the apparent misrepresentations,” Sauer wrote. “This court should stay the district court’s deeply flawed preliminary injunction and should grant an immediate administrative stay.”

Categories / Courts, Economy, Government, Politics

Subscribe to our free newsletters

Our weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.

Loading...