Slaughter v. Trump: SCOTUS Implications for Retailers
- By [ Josh Moore ]
- 12/10/2025
The Case in a Nutshell
The case in question concerns the President’s firing of FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter. The FTC is composed of five commissioners who are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate to serve seven-year terms. Under the laws governing the FTC, commissioners can only be removed from office for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” However, in March of this year, the President sent Ms. Slaughter an email firing her which did not list any reason for the firing.
Ms. Slaughter sued, arguing that the firing violated the FTC Act because the President did not contend that Ms. Slaughter had engaged in “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” At the heart of the dispute in the case is a nearly century-old precedent, Humphrey’s Executor v. United States (1935), which held that the FTC Act’s prohibition on the President from firing commissioners of the FTC without cause was constitutional.
By firing Ms. Slaughter without listing any reason, the current administration is directly challenging this precedent. The core question in the case goes beyond just the FTC, but concerns whether Congress can restrict the President’s power to fire the heads of any number of multi-member independent agencies like the FTC. If the Supreme Court sides with the Trump administration—as it seems likely they will—it’s ruling would grant the White House significantly more control over roughly two dozen multi-member agencies including such agencies as the NRLB, EEOC, NTSB, and FEC.
After oral argument, it appears likely there is a majority on the Court willing to uphold the firing of Mrs. Slaughter and conclude that the FTC Act’s prohibition on firing except in cases of good cause is unconstitutional. Rather, the Court appears ready to side with the administration and conclude that the president has unfettered authority to fire multi-member agency heads at will.
Looming in the background of the decision is the Federal Reserve, which also has a statute that restricts the firing of its board members without cause. However, the Court appears ready to distinguish the Federal Reserve as a distinct entity that, as a result of its unique history and quasi-private structure, would not be subject to the ruling.
The Bottom Line
If the Court rules broadly in favor of the government, the “independent” agency may become a thing of the past, where agency heads at the FTC, EEOC, and NLRB serve at the pleasure of the President rather than fixed terms (although any replacements would still be subject to the Senate confirmation process). The decision may also spur Congress to rethink the powers these agencies have in the first place. Either way, retailers should prepare for a regulatory environment that is less predictable and more susceptible to swift political pivots.
A decision in the case is expected by late June.
Tags
-
Retail Litigation Center
-
Forced Labor
-
Public Policy
