This Giving Tuesday, help ensure voters have the information they need to make confident, informed decisions. Donate now!

Trump v. Slaughter

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
New Administrative State Banner.png
Supreme Court of the United States
Trump v. Slaughter
Docket number: 25-332
Term: 2025
Court: United States Supreme Court
Important dates
Argument: December 8, 2025
Court membership
Chief Justice John Roberts • Clarence Thomas • Samuel Alito • Sonia Sotomayor • Elena Kagan • Neil Gorsuch • Brett Kavanaugh • Amy Coney Barrett • Ketanji Brown Jackson

Trump v. Slaughter is a case scheduled for argument before the Supreme Court of the United States on December 8, 2025, during the court's October 2025-2026 term.

HIGHLIGHTS
  • The questions presented: "(1) Whether the statutory removal protections for members of the Federal Trade Commission violate the separation of powers and, if so, whether Humphrey's Executor v. United States, 295 U. S. 602 (1935), should be overruled.

    (2) Whether a federal court may prevent a person’s removal from public office, either through relief at equity or at law."[1]

  • The outcome: The appeal is pending adjudication before the U.S. Supreme Court.


    • The case came on a writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. To review the lower court's opinion, click here.

    Why it matters: The case asks whether Congress may restrict the President’s ability to remove Federal Trade Commission commissioners—a question the Supreme Court last addressed in Humphrey's Executor v. United States (1935). In Humphrey's Executor, the Court held that the Federal Trade Commission Act’s requirement of cause for removal was constitutional and that the President could not dismiss an FTC commissioner solely for policy disagreements. Trump v. Slaughter raises the same statutory protection and tests whether those limits on presidential removal still govern the modern FTC.

    The Court’s resolution will determine how the long-standing removal standard applies today and clarify the scope of presidential authority over an independent federal agency whose members serve fixed terms and are protected by statute. The case therefore has significant implications for the structure and operation of the FTC and for how separation-of-powers principles apply to agencies with similar removal protections.

    Background

    Administrative State
    Administrative State Icon Gold.png
    Five Pillars of the Administrative State
    • Judicial deference
    • Nondelegation
    • Executive control
    • Procedural rights
    • Agency dynamics
    Click here for more coverage of the administrative state on Ballotpedia
    See also: [[]]

    Case summary

    The following are the parties to this case:[2]

    • Petitioner: Donald Trump, President of the United States, et al.
    • Respondent: Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, et al.
      • Legal counsel: Amitabh Agarwal, Protect Democracy Project

    The following summary of the case was published by Oyez, a free law project from Cornell’s Legal Information Institute, Justia, and the Chicago-Kent College of Law:[3]

    “ Rebecca Kelly Slaughter was serving as a Commissioner on the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), an agency led by five commissioners appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate to seven-year terms. The Federal Trade Commission Act limits the President’s ability to remove an FTC Commissioner to “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” President Donald J. Trump fired Commissioner Slaughter, explaining her continued service was “inconsistent with [the] Administration’s priorities,” which did not meet the statutory standard of “cause.” Slaughter sued President Trump and the three remaining FTC Commissioners, arguing her removal was unlawful because the President failed to offer a statutory cause.

    The district court ruled in favor of Commissioner Slaughter, declaring her removal unlawful, ordering her reinstatement, and issuing a permanent injunction against the remaining Commissioners and their subordinates, barring them from interfering with her duties. The government appealed the decision and requested a stay of the district court's order pending the appeal. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit denied the government’s motion for a stay pending appeal and dissolved an administrative stay that had been previously entered. The Supreme Court granted the stay on September 22, 2025, and also granted certiorari.[4]

    		”

    Timeline

    The following timeline details key events in this case:

    Questions presented

    The petitioner presented the following questions to the court:[1]

    Questions presented:
    “ (1) Whether the statutory removal protections for members of the Federal Trade Commission violate the separation of powers and, if so, whether Humphrey's Executor v. United States, 295 U. S. 602 (1935), should be overruled.

    (2) Whether a federal court may prevent a person’s removal from public office, either through relief at equity or at law.[4]

    		”

    Oral argument

    Audio

    Audio of the case will be posted here when it is made available.

    Transcript

    A transcript of the case will be posted here when it is made available.

    Outcome

    The case is pending adjudication before the U.S. Supreme Court.

    October term 2025-2026

    See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2025-2026

    The Supreme Court began hearing cases for the term on October 6, 2025. The court's yearly term begins on the first Monday in October and lasts until the first Monday in October the following year. The court generally releases the majority of its decisions by mid-June.[5]


    See also

    External links

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 Supreme Court of the United States, "25-332 TRUMP V. SLAUGHTER QP", September 22, 2025
    2. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Docket for 25-332 Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, et al.", accessed Dec. 5, 2025
    3. ↑ Oyez, ""Trump v. Slaughter,"" accessed Dec. 5, 2025
    4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
    5. ↑ SupremeCourt.gov, "The Supreme Court at Work: The Term and Caseload," accessed January 24, 2022
    v • e
    The Administrative State
    MainThe Administrative State Project Badge.png
    Pillars
    Reporting
    Laws
    Administrative Procedure Act • Antiquities Act • Civil Service Reform Act • Clayton Antitrust Act • Communications Act of 1934 • Congressional Review Act • Electronic Freedom of Information Act • Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 • Federal Housekeeping Statute • Federal Reserve Act • Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 • Freedom of Information Act • Government in the Sunshine Act • Independent Offices Appropriations Act of 1952 • Information Quality Act • Interstate Commerce Act • National Labor Relations Act • Paperwork Reduction Act • Pendleton Act • Privacy Act of 1974 • Regulatory Flexibility Act • REINS Act • REINS Act (Wisconsin) • Securities Act of 1933 • Securities Exchange Act of 1934 • Sherman Antitrust Act • Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act • Truth in Regulating Act • Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    Cases
    Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner • A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States • Association of Data Processing Service Organizations v. Camp • Auer v. Robbins • Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe • Federal Trade Commission (FTC) v. Standard Oil Company of California • Field v. Clark • Food and Drug Administration v. Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corporation • Humphrey's Executor v. United States • Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) v. Chadha • J.W. Hampton Jr. & Company v. United States • Lucia v. SEC • Marshall v. Barlow's • Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency • Mistretta v. United States • National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) v. Sebelius • National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning Company • National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. • Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan • Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation • Skidmore v. Swift & Co. • United States v. Lopez • United States v. Western Pacific Railroad Co. • Universal Camera Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board • Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Wayman v. Southard • Weyerhaeuser Company v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service • Whitman v. American Trucking Associations • Wickard v. Filburn • Wiener v. United States
    Terms
    Adjudication (administrative state) • Administrative judge • Administrative law • Administrative law judge • Administrative state • Arbitrary-or-capricious test • Auer deference • Barrier to entry • Bootleggers and Baptists • Chevron deference (doctrine) • Civil servant • Civil service • Code of Federal Regulations • Codify (administrative state) • Comment period • Compliance costs • Congressional Record • Coordination (administrative state) • Deference (administrative state) • Direct and indirect costs (administrative state) • Enabling statute • Ex parte communication (administrative state) • Executive agency • Federal law • Federal Register • Federalism • Final rule • Formal rulemaking • Formalism (law) • Functionalism (law) • Guidance (administrative state) • Hybrid rulemaking • Incorporation by reference • Independent federal agency • Informal rulemaking • Joint resolution of disapproval (administrative state) • Major rule • Negotiated rulemaking • Nondelegation doctrine • OIRA prompt letter • Organic statute • Pragmatism (law) • Precautionary principle • Promulgate • Proposed rule • Publication rulemaking • Regulatory budget • Regulatory capture • Regulatory dark matter • Regulatory impact analysis • Regulatory policy officer • Regulatory reform officer • Regulatory review • Rent seeking • Retrospective regulatory review • Risk assessment (administrative state) • Rulemaking • Separation of powers • Significant regulatory action • Skidmore deference • Statutory authority • Substantive law and procedural law • Sue and settle • Sunset provision • Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions • United States Code • United States Statutes at Large
    Bibliography
    Agencies


    Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Trump_v._Slaughter&oldid=10714279"