Ketanji Jackson Challenges Presidential Authority While Kavanaugh Warns Of Agency Sabotage [WATCH]

The Supreme Court held more than two hours of oral arguments Monday in Trump v. Slaughter, a case that will determine whether the President of the United States has the constitutional authority to remove commissioners who lead independent federal agencies, as reported by The Gateway Pundit.

The case stems from President Trump’s March decision to remove Federal Trade Commission commissioners Rebecca Kelly Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya.

FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson issued a statement at the time, saying, “President Donald J. Trump is the head of the executive branch and is vested with all of the executive power in our government. I have no doubts about his constitutional authority to remove Commissioners, which is necessary to ensure democratic accountability for our government. The Federal Trade Commission will continue its tireless work to protect consumers, lower prices, and police anticompetitive behavior.”

Slaughter and Bedoya sued after being removed. In July, U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan, appointed by former President Biden, ruled in Slaughter’s favor and ordered her reinstated. The D.C. Circuit upheld that ruling, citing the 1935 case Humphrey’s Executor.

In September, the Supreme Court granted the Trump administration’s request for a stay, allowing the removal to remain in effect pending full review.

During Monday’s arguments, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson questioned whether presidents should have the authority to remove the leadership of certain independent agencies.

She said Congress had established structures where “non-partisan experts”—including scientists, economists, and regulators—hold responsibilities that she argued should not fall under direct presidential control.

This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year

Reflecting concerns she linked to the Founding era, Justice Jackson said, “That some issues, some matters, some areas should be handled in this way by non-partisan experts; that Congress is saying that expertise matters with respect to aspects of the economy and transportation and the various independent agencies that we have. So having a President come in and fire all the scientists, and the doctors, and the economists, and the PhDs, and replace them with loyalists and people who don’t know anything, is actually not in the best interest of the citizens of the United States.”

She added, “These issues should not be in presidential control. Can you speak to me about the danger of allowing, in these various areas, the President to actually control the Transportation Board and potentially the Federal Reserve and all these other independent agencies? In these particular areas, we would like to have independence. We… we don’t want the President controlling.”

Justice Jackson continued by asking why Congress’s judgment “should take precedence,” noting, “One would think, under our constitutional design, given the history of the monarchy and the concerns the Framers had about a President controlling everything, that in the clash between those two, Congress’s view—that we should be able to have independence with respect to certain issues—should take precedence.”

Ketanji lost it today during oral arguments and went on a “No Kings” style rant about President Trump wanting to rule like a monarch, and how we should instead have many issues handled by “the experts and PhDs” like Dr. Fauci, Dr. “Rachel” Levine, and the gay bondage AIDS dude. pic.twitter.com/Z8qFZgZzsR

— Bad Hombre (@Badhombre) December 8, 2025

Justice Brett Kavanaugh posed a hypothetical about potential structural problems arising when independent agencies are staffed in a way that prevents a newly elected president from carrying out executive functions.

He asked, “I want to give you a chance to deal with the hard hypothetical. When both Houses of Congress and the President are controlled by the same party, they create a lot of these independent agencies or extend some of the current independent agencies into these kinds of situations so as to thwart future Presidents of the opposite party.”

JUST IN: SCOTUS Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Sam Alito NUKE the “independent commission” scam, an apparent win for Trump

Their argument: Can Congress just make ANY Cabinet office an “independent commission,” thereby DESTROYING the presidency?

KAVANAUGH: “Independent agencies… pic.twitter.com/4dENQkZD56

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) December 8, 2025

The hearing is part of an ongoing challenge to longstanding limits on presidential removal authority. A decision is expected later in the term.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LifeZette. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.