U.S. Supreme Court Grants Stay Enabling Removal of Rebecca Kelly Slaughter as FTC Commissioner and Will Revisit Separation of Powers
Time 2 Minute Read
Categories: U.S. Federal Law

On September 22, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court granted on its emergency docket President Trump’s application for a stay of the lower federal court’s order for Rebecca Kelly Slaughter to be reinstated as FTC Commissioner after Trump fired her, and decided to revisit separation of powers issues, including whether to overrule its 1935 decision in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States.

Trump fired Slaughter and fellow Democratic commissioner Alvaro Bedoya in March 2025, claiming that their “continued service on the FTC is inconsistent with my administration's priorities.” Slaughter and Bedoya challenged their dismissals in court, but Bedoya ultimately resigned from his position. On July 17, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled in Slaughter’s favor. On September 2, 2025, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered Slaughter to be reinstated, citing the “for-cause” removal protections in the FTC Act set forth in the 1935 Supreme Court decision Humphrey’s Executor v. United States. The Justice Department then appealed to the Supreme Court on an emergency basis, asking for a stay of the reinstatement order. On September 8, 2025, U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts issued an order temporarily staying the reinstatement order. The Supreme Court has now stayed the District Court’s reinstatement order until the Supreme Court issues its final judgment in the matter.

In its ruling on the application for a stay, the Supreme Court granted certiorari and directed the parties to address whether the statutory removal protections for members of the FTC, which bar the President from firing FTC Commissioners except for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office,” violate the separation of powers and, if so, whether Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, which gave Congress the power to prohibit the President from removing the commissioners of independent agencies except for cause, should be overruled. The Supreme Court also directed the parties to address whether a federal court may prevent a person’s removal from public office.

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 3 Minute Read

The Connecticut Attorney General recently issued a legal memorandum regarding the application of existing Connecticut laws, such as the Connecticut Data Privacy Act, to the use of artificial intelligence.

Time 3 Minute Read

On March 20, 2026, Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt signed SB 546 into law, enacting the Oklahoma Consumer Data Privacy Act, which will take effect on January 1, 2027.

Time 2 Minute Read

On February 5, 2026, Alabama Governor Kay Ivey signed Alabama House Bill 161, the App Store Accountability Act, establishing age categorization, age verification and parental consent requirements for mobile application marketplace providers operating in Alabama, effective January 2027.

Time 2 Minute Read

On March 5, 2026, the California Privacy Protection Agency announced that the agency had reached a settlement with Ford Motor Company resolving an enforcement action against the company that alleged noncompliance with the California Consumer Privacy Act’s opt-out of sale/sharing rights.

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Archives

Jump to Page