Trump celebrates SCOTUS decision to overturn historic precedent and grant 'greatest increase in presidential power in the last 100 years' in Slaughter case

In a decision that further strengthens executive power, the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) issued a ruling in the case known as Trump v. Slaughter, which overturns nearly 90 years of legal doctrine, significantly expanding the powers of the executive branch.

On Monday, SCOTUS ruled by a vote of 6 to 3 that the president has the authority to fire Rebecca Slaughter, a Democratic commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

The Supreme Court majority held that “subordinates who exercise the President's power are subject to removal by him,” reaffirming the principle of presidential control over senior officials in federal agencies.

"Inconsistent with my Administration’s priorities"

During his first term, Trump nominated Slaughter to the FTC. Joe Biden renominated her in 2023 for a second term. In 2025, Trump immediately removed her from office, arguing that her continued service was “inconsistent with my Administration's priorities.” 

Rebecca Slaughter filed a lawsuit in a federal court in Washington, D.C., where the judge ordered her reinstatement; a panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that decision, noting that only the Supreme Court could overturn the precedent set in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States (1935), a landmark SCOTUS decision that limited the president’s power to fire officials from independent agencies.

Trump rejoices over historic expansion of presidential power

The president enthusiastically celebrated the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Slaughter case. In a post on Truth Social, he emphasized that this was “the Greatest Increase in Presidential Power in the last 100 years” and called it a “monumental ruling” at a pivotal moment.

Previously, Trump had noted that the ruling completely overturned 90 years of precedent, “greatly increasing Presidential Power at a time when it is most needed.”

The debate over independence of regulatory agencies

While conservative circles argue that these agencies accumulate too much power without sufficient accountability, progressives defend their independence as a guarantee of technical decision-making.

Progressive Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in her dissenting opinion, warned that this interpretation could lead to administrative “chaos” by drastically reducing the independence of regulatory agencies.