In a pivotal legal battle, appellate judges in Washington, D.C. are set to determine whether the president has the constitutional authority to dismiss board members from independent agencies established by Congress. The case specifically questions President Trump’s removal of National Labor Relations Board member Gwynne Wilcox and Merit Systems Protection Board member Cathy Harris without cause earlier this year. Previous rulings have favored the board members, citing a 1935 Supreme Court decision known as Humphrey’s Executor that limits the president’s removal powers.

The Trump administration has challenged these decisions, arguing that the lower court judges misinterpreted the 1935 ruling and overstepped their authority in ordering the reinstatements. The upcoming hearing involves three D.C. Circuit Court judges, with differing perspectives based on their appointing administrations.

The implications of this case extend beyond Wilcox and Harris, affecting the independence of various government boards. Trump’s stance is that restrictions on firing board members are unconstitutional, while the board members warn of broader repercussions if the president’s authority is upheld. The competing interpretations of the Constitution, the extent of executive power, and the potential impact on agency independence are at the crux of this legal dispute, with far-reaching consequences for the structure and autonomy of government agencies.