Since the start of President Trump’s second administration, the president and his allies have sought to fundamentally remake the federal government, including by firing 34 political appointees across the government who make sure our government runs—from watchdogs responsible for investigating waste, fraud, abuse and ethical misconduct, to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who is supposed to serve as the president’s apolitical principal military advisor. These individuals, most of whom are Senate-confirmed, have served through multiple administrations and were appointed by Republican and Democratic presidents, including ten who were appointed by President Trump himself. 

These firings are an unprecedented attack on independent agencies and government accountability. While presidents have at times removed individual appointees, this is a uniquely widescale attempt to undermine independence and weaken institutional guardrails. When President Reagan took office, his decision to remove all 15 inspectors general was met with bipartisan uproar, leading some of the fired inspectors general to be reinstated. Since then, members of Congress have urged new administrations not to fire inspectors general, and presidents aside from Trump have generally followed suit. President Biden even chose not to fire Department of Homeland Security Inspector General Joseph Cuffari after an independent, nonpartisan investigation found that he abused his powers.

Whether these firings are legal is a question courts are grappling with. To date, lawsuits have been filed by eight inspectors general who argue their firing violated provisions of the bipartisan Securing Inspector General Independence Act, by the chair of the National Labor Relations Board, by the chair of the Merit Systems Protection Board whose firing a federal judge ruled violated a federal law that prevents presidents from removing members of the Merit Systems Protection Board except for “inefficiency, neglect of duty or malfeasance in office” and by the fired Senate-confirmed head of the Office of Special Counsel who dropped his lawsuit, in part because he felt he wasn’t likely to succeed before the Supreme Court.

However, perhaps no firing more clearly highlights the grave threat of Trump’s attacks on  independent appointees than his firing on March 18 of the two Democratic members of the Federal Trade Commission. This move blatantly flies in the face of the Supreme Court’s unanimous 1935 decision in Humphrey’s Executor v. U.S, which held that the president could not remove members of the Federal Trade Commission on policy grounds. Over time, that decision has come to stand for the proposition that the president does not have unlimited power to dismiss members of any independent regulatory body wielding “quasi-judicial and quasi-legislative” power without cause. On March 27, the commissioners filed a lawsuit against their firing, arguing that it was illegal based on Humphrey’s Executor v. US.

The Trump administration has not been shy about hiding its desire to overturn Humphrey’s Executor, stating in a letter to Senator Dick Durbin, the Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, that the Department of Justice “intends to urge the Supreme Court to overrule [the Humphrey’s Executor] decision, which prevents the President from adequately supervising principal officers in the Executive Branch.” A decision to overturn Humphrey’s Executor would end independent agencies as we know them, legitimize Trump’s illegal firing spree and give presidents of both parties the freedom to install their politically-aligned appointees to positions that are specifically designed to be apolitical. 

The table below reflects the current status of each firing, including the person’s position, agency, the date they were fired, the legality of the firing and the status of any litigation filed.

Read More in Reports