Staff Reports
In what could only be described as a bold move for presidential authority, the Trump administration is allegedly gearing up to challenge a nearly 90-year-old Supreme Court ruling known as Humphrey’s Executor. This case, which has quietly governed the relationship between federal agencies and the presidency since 1935, could soon face a serious shake-up at the hands of a conservative legal team that believes it’s high time to remind Washington just who’s in charge.
Humphrey’s Executor was the Supreme Court’s way of saying that once appointed, leaders of various federal agencies can’t just be treated like a game of musical chairs by the president—that he can’t fire them without cause. This ruling effectively established a labyrinthine system of independent regulatory agencies, leaving presidents feeling a bit like they’re running a dog show where they can’t even choose their handlers. But conservatives have repeatedly pointed out that the Constitution is supposed to vest power in the president, not outside bureaucrats who might have their own agendas.
Curiously, the genesis of the case goes back to the FDR administration during the New Deal frenzy. When President Franklin D. Roosevelt sought to replace William Humphrey—an appointee from the Coolidge and Hoover days—he was met with a pesky refusal. The ensuing battle resulted in the Supreme Court stepping in to declare that not only was FDR wrong, but that independent agencies were officially a thing, creating an enduring headache for presidents ever since.
The legal empowerment given to federal agencies has been a thorn in the side of constitutional purists who argue that an overreach of bureaucracy has morphed into an “administrative state” that sticks its nose where it doesn’t belong. The prevailing sentiment among conservative legal minds is that, if the president appoints these agency heads, he should have free rein to fire them, whenever and for whatever reason he pleases—after all, isn’t that part of the deal?
A month into President Donald Trump 's second term, lawyers for the Republican administration seem intent on provoking a legal fight to overturn a 90-year-old Supreme Court decision known as Humphrey's Executor that has been critical to the development… https://t.co/GoR1GgMV1a
— Washington Times Local (@WashTimesLocal) February 20, 2025
The current composition of the Supreme Court, now sporting a conservative majority thanks to Trump’s previous appointments, has shown a willingness to challenge the long-standing norms of Humphrey’s Executor. Chief Justice John Roberts, along with Justices Thomas and Gorsuch, have hinted that the days of independent agency power could be numbered. Some legal experts worry that overturning this ruling could unleash a wave of executive fury, turning various federal agencies into the president’s personal attack dogs—which some could argue isn’t entirely unfounded when evaluating past administrations.
Now, with several cases looming that could redefine the limits of executive power, the future of the Humphrey’s Executor decision hangs in the balance. It stands to reason that this could end up impacting everything from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to the Federal Election Commission. So, as the Supreme Court gears up to hear the Trump administration’s case, it seems that the balance of power may soon undergo one of its most significant shifts in nearly a century. Rest assured, it promises to be anything but boring.
