Leaders from independent agencies discuss the implications of undermining for-cause protections for regulatory officials.
Since returning to office, President Donald J. Trump has taken unprecedented steps to assert control over federal agencies that have long operated independently of the White House. These steps have included removing the heads of agencies who, by statute, may only be removed for “cause.” The President has argued that statutory restrictions on presidential removal authority violate the U.S. Constitution’s separation of power.
The President’s actions have reverberated across the administrative state, affecting regulatory agencies responsible for enforcing federal labor laws, protecting consumer safety, overseeing federal employment practices, and ensuring fair competition. In several instances, these removals have left agencies without quorums required to act, stalled rulemakings, and prompted legal challenges to longstanding statutory protections.
Those challenges that have culminated in Trump v. Slaughter, now before the U.S. Supreme Court. At issue in Slaughter is whether the Court should overturn its 1935 decision in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States. In that decision, the Court upheld the U.S. Congress’s authority to protect members of independent regulatory boards and commissions from removal except for cause.
Late last year, the Penn Program on Regulation sponsored a historic conversation, “The Last of the Independents,” with nine leaders from a diverse array of independent agencies who shared the stories of their removal. The discussion focused on how the President’s actions—and, if the Court overrules Humphrey’s Executor, how its decision—will affect the regulatory work of independent agencies and the public.
This series features essays from the following participants in “The Last of the Independents”: Hampton Dellinger, U.S. Office of Special Counsel; Susan Tsui Grundmann, Federal Labor Relations Authority; Alex Hoehn-Saric, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission; Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, U.S. Federal Trade Commission; Richard L. Trumka, Jr., U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission; and Gwynne A. Wilcox, National Labor Relations Board.
What Humphrey’s Legacy Protects
March 2, 2026 | Rebecca Kelly Slaughter
Overturning the precedent that protects FTC independence would invite corruption and public distrust.
In Support of Bipartisan Leadership at Independent Agencies
March 3, 2026 | Susan Tsui Grundmann
Bipartisan leadership safeguards both the process and purpose of independent agencies.
Standing Up for the Independence of the NLRB
March 4, 2026 | Gwynne A. Wilcox
Attacks on the National Labor Relations Board’s leaders undermine their work and independence.
Stripping Agency Independence Has Condemned Americans to Death
March 5, 2026 | Richard L. Trumka, Jr.
Undermining the independence of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission will endanger American lives.
Independent Regulation of Consumer Product Safety
March 6, 2026 | Alex Hoehn-Saric
Weakening the independence of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission puts the public welfare at risk.
No Independence? No Need
March 9, 2026 | Hampton Dellinger
The agency tasked with protecting federal employees, including whistleblowers, should be abolished.
