Trump v. Cook | Argument Date: 1/21/26 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether Federal Reserve Board governors possess Fifth Amendment property rights in their offices and whether "for cause" removal authority permits presidential removal based on pre-office conduct.

Overview: President Trump's 30-minute ultimatum removal of Fed Governor Cook over mortgage misrepresentations creates unprecedented constitutional crisis testing presidential power against central bank independence and due process rights.

Posture: D.C. Circuit denied emergency stay by 2-1 vote; Governor Cook continues serving pending appeal.

Main Arguments:

• Trump (Petitioner): (1) Federal offices constitute no Fifth Amendment property interest under longstanding precedent; (2) "For cause" permits broad removal discretion for misconduct affecting fitness including pre-office conduct; (3) Presidential removal determinations remain unreviewable by courts absent explicit congressional authorization

• Cook (Respondent): (1) Tenure-protected officers possess constitutionally protected property interest requiring pre-removal hearing under Loudermill; (2) "For cause" historically limited to in-office conduct under 1913/1935 statutory backdrop; (3) Judicial review prevents presidential circumvention of congressional restrictions protecting agency independence

Implications: Trump victory eliminates due process protections for principal officers while expanding presidential control over independent agencies through discretionary "for cause" interpretations. Cook victory establishes constitutional hearing requirements for tenure-protected removal while constraining presidential authority to politicize Federal Reserve monetary policy decisions affecting national economic stability.

The Fine Print:

• 12 U.S.C. § 242: "Any member of the Board may be removed for cause by the President"

• Fifth Amendment: "No person shall be...deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"

Primary Cases:

• Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill (1985): Tenure-protected public employees possess property interest in continued employment requiring pre-termination notice and hearing opportunity

• Taylor v. Beckham (1900): Political offices constitute no property rights protected by Due Process Clause; removal from office triggers no constitutional process requirements