Supreme Court Temporarily Allows Trump to Remove Biden-Appointed Consumer Safety Officials

In a controversial move, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that former President Donald Trump can, for now, remove three Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) members appointed by President Joe Biden—without needing to show cause. The temporary order challenges long-standing legal precedent designed to protect the independence of federal regulatory agencies.

The ruling, issued via the Court’s emergency docket, does not offer a final judgment on the issue but allows Trump’s action to proceed while lower courts continue reviewing the matter.

---

A Blow to Regulatory Independence

The Supreme Court’s decision is the latest in a series of cases redefining the balance of power between the Executive Branch and independent federal agencies. The justices cited similarities to past rulings involving the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), suggesting the Consumer Product Safety Commission operates in a comparable way and thus falls within the president’s removal authority.

In a brief order, the Court wrote:

“The Consumer Product Safety Commission exercises executive power in a similar manner as the National Labor Relations Board, and the case does not otherwise differ from Wilcox in any pertinent respect.”

Justice Brett Kavanaugh filed a separate opinion, indicating he would have preferred the Court to take up the full case for review during its fall term. But the majority opted to act now, granting temporary relief to Trump while the lower courts continue weighing the merits.

---

Liberal Justices Sound the Alarm

The Court’s three liberal justices—Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson—dissented sharply. Writing for the group, Justice Kagan criticized the majority’s use of the so-called “shadow docket,” a term referring to emergency decisions made without full briefing or oral argument.

“The majority has acted on the emergency docket—with little time, scant briefing, and no argument—to override Congress’s decisions about how to structure administrative agencies,” Kagan warned.
“This Court may facilitate the permanent transfer of authority, piece by piece by piece, from one branch of Government to another.”

---

A Historic Precedent in Question

Legal experts say the Court’s decision raises fresh questions about the future of Humphrey’s Executor, the landmark 1935 Supreme Court ruling that has shaped agency independence for nearly a century. In that case, the Court unanimously blocked President Franklin D. Roosevelt from removing a Federal Trade Commission official simply because of policy disagreements. The ruling affirmed Congress’s ability to shield members of independent agencies from political removal unless misconduct or incapacity was proven.

While the current ruling is not a final verdict, it effectively weakens that precedent—at least temporarily—by allowing the president to act unilaterally in dismissing officials before the courts fully resolve the matter.

---

Background: A Political Power Struggle

President Biden appointed the three commissioners in 2021 to serve on the CPSC, an independent agency tasked with ensuring consumer products meet federal safety standards. The commission also oversees recalls, bans hazardous items, and conducts safety research.

However, shortly after returning to office, President Trump attempted to dismiss all three commissioners, even though their terms had not yet expired. The dismissed officials sued, arguing that the CPSC’s structure protects them from being removed without cause, such as neglect of duty or proven wrongdoing.

In response, the Trump administration argued that the commissioners hold significant executive authority and are therefore subject to removal at the president’s discretion.

A federal judge in Maryland temporarily blocked the removals and ordered the commissioners reinstated pending further legal proceedings. When the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals declined to intervene, the Trump administration appealed to the Supreme Court.

---

Echoes of Previous Cases

This is not the first time the Court has weighed in on Trump’s authority over independent agencies. Earlier this year, in a 6-3 decision, the justices allowed Trump to remove Democratic-appointed members of the National Labor Relations Board and the Merit Systems Protection Board—also without cause.

As in the current case, the three liberal justices dissented.

Despite granting temporary relief in both instances, the Court has declined to fast-track full hearings on the legality of such removals, pushing comprehensive review of these questions to a future term.

---

What Comes Next

While the Supreme Court has not issued a final judgment on whether the president can remove CPSC commissioners at will, the decision sends a strong signal about the current majority’s willingness to expand executive power over independent regulatory bodies.

The temporary ruling could have far-reaching implications for agencies designed to operate independently from political influence, and legal scholars are watching closely for how the issue is ultimately resolved.

Until then, President Trump may continue to remove Biden’s appointees, even as legal battles play out in the lower courts.