Court overturns Trump’s firings of two independent agency board members

An appeals court has paved the way for a likely showdown in the US supreme court over presidential power after reinstating two federal agency heads fired from their posts in Donald Trump’s all-out assault on the government bureaucracy.

The Washington DC court of appeals ordered that Cathy Harris and Gwynne Wilcox be restored to the positions with the Merit Systems Protection Board and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) respectively. The ruling overturned a previous verdict by a three-judge panel which had ruled that their dismissals – which had been earlier overturned under legal challenge – were indeed legal.

It is the latest twist in the legal status of the two officials, but unlikely to be the last.

Monday’s ruling by the full court was along party lines, with seven judges appointed by Democratic presidents voting to reinstate the women against four dissenters, who were all appointed to the bench by Republican administrations.

The Trump administration is not expected to accept the latest ruling, but is instead likely to ask the supreme court to rule on the constitutional basis of a 90-year-old legal precedent on which it is based.

Harris and Wilcox have been repeatedly fired and reinstated since Trump’s inauguration following contradictory rulings.

Both have alleged that their unceremonious firings breach an existing 1978 law which says that agency members can only be dismissed for “inefficiency, neglect of duty or malfeasance in office”. Neither was given a reason why they were being terminated.

Wilcox became the first Black woman on the NLRB after being confirmed by the Senate following her nomination by Joe Biden in 2021. She was reconfirmed after being nominated to a second term in 2023.

Harris is head of a previously obscure agency whose power to review and reverse federal employee firings has now assumed central relevance in light of the mass dismissals of federal workers and government watchdogs carried out since Trump took office.

She was initially reinstated on 4 March following the ruling of a district court judge, Rudolph Contreras, who wrote that Trump’s firing of her a month earlier was unlawful because he cited no cause.

Although subsequent rulings later confirmed the initial firings, the appeals court justified its judgment with reference to a 1935 supreme court ruling, which protects the heads of independent agencies from being removed by a president.

“The supreme court has repeatedly told the courts of appeals to follow extant supreme court precedent unless and until that court itself changes it or overturns it,” the appeals court’s ruling stated.

Some Trump administration officials have said the 90-year-old ruling is unconstitutional and have said the supreme court should overturn it. Some of the court’s conservative-leaning justices have indicated a readiness to do so.

A minority dissenting opinion on Tuesday’s ruling, written by Karen Henderson – appointed under George HW Bush – said the supreme court should be asked to rule. “Only the supreme court can decide the dispute and, in my opinion, the sooner, the better,” she wrote.