Trump asks Supreme Court to let him fire members of Consumer Product Safety Commission

CBS News

20 hours ago

Washington — President Trump's administration asked the Supreme Court on Wednesday to allow him to fire three members of the independent Consumer Product Safety Commission.
The request to the high court by Solicitor General D. John Sauer arose from a federal judge's decision earlier this month that found Mr. Trump's removal of the three commissioners — Mary Boyle, Alexander Hoehn-Saric and Richard Trumka Jr. — was unlawful and blocked their terminations.
The officials had been named to the five-member Consumer Product Safety Commission by former President Joe Biden for seven-year terms. Boyle's term was set to end in October, Hoehn-Saric's time on the panel was due to end in October 2027 and Trumka's in October 2028. The commission sets consumer product safety standards, can order product recalls and bring civil suits against companies.
The three members were told in May that their positions were terminated, effective immediately. Under federal law, a president cannot remove a commissioner at-will, but only for neglect of duty or malfeasance. Removal restrictions like those governing the Consumer Product Safety Commission have been put in place by Congress to insulate independent agencies from politics. But Mr. Trump has sought to test his removal powers through a series of firings targeting members of those entities.
Following their firings, the commissioners sued and asked a federal judge in Maryland, where the Consumer Product Safety Commission is headquartered, to restore them to their positions. They succeeded in their bid earlier this month, when U.S. District Judge Matthew Maddox allowed the three commissioners to resume their roles.
"Depriving this five-member commission of three of its sitting members threatens severe impairment of its ability to fulfill its statutory mandates and advance the public's interest in safe consumer products," Maddox wrote in his decision. "This hardship and threat to public safety significantly outweighs any hardship defendants might suffer from plaintiffs' participation on the CPSC."
A unanimous panel of three judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit declined to block the district court's decision and allow Mr. Trump to fire the commissioners.
The commissioners, Judge James Wynn wrote in a brief opinion, "were appointed to serve fixed terms with statutory protections designed to preserve the commission's independence and partisan balance. Permitting their unlawful removal would thwart that purpose and deprive the public of the commission's full expertise and oversight. And because the attempted removals were unlawful, the Plaintiff-Commissioners never ceased to lawfully occupy their offices."
Sauer's emergency appeal to the Supreme Court is the third involving the president's power to remove executive officers, which the administration has argued is generally unrestricted.
The justices in May cleared the way for Mr. Trump to remove without cause two members of two federal independent labor boards while legal fights over their terminations move forward. Over the dissent of the three liberal justices, the high court said in its unsigned decision that it "reflects our judgment that the government faces greater risk of harm from an order allowing a removed officer to continue exercising the executive power than a wrongfully removed officer faces from being unable to perform her statutory duty."
Sauer said that May decision from the high court regarding the earlier removals should have foreclosed the reinstatement of the Consumer Product Safety Commission members. The district court's order, he wrote, effectively transfers control of the panel from Mr. Trump to three members who were appointed by his predecessor.
"That plain-as-day affront to the President's fundamental Article II powers warrants intervention now," the solicitor general wrote.
Sauer asked the high court to act immediately and issue a brief administrative stay that would allow it more time to consider his request for emergency relief. Lawyers for the commissioners opposed that request for swift action, noting that they have been serving in their roles in the nearly three weeks since the district judge ruled in their favor.
The Trump administration, the lawyers said, did not identify any harm that would stem from the commissioner's continued service during the time it will take for the Supreme Court to rule.