Most of the Trump administration’s legal disputes involving the firing of high-level officials deal with the scope of presidential power.
On Jan. 21, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in one of the most significant cases of this kind to date. It was brought by Lisa Cook, a member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve. The Fed serves as the U.S. central bank and sets monetary policy – including a key interest rate that influences borrowing costs.
President Joe Biden nominated Cook in 2022, and she was sworn in in May of that year.
President Donald Trump fired her on Aug. 25, 2025, but a lower court temporarily reinstated Cook to her role on Sept. 9.
Based on the oral arguments, a majority of the court’s justices seem inclined to protect the Fed’s independence by treating this case as an employment dispute. As a law professor who specializes in employment law and follows the Supreme Court, I can explain how that might play out.
To be sure, this is not a typical employment law case because Cook has far more legal rights to her job than most American workers.
The vast majority of U.S. workers are employed “at-will” – meaning they can be fired for any reason and severed from their jobs with no advance notice. Cook’s position is covered by the Federal Reserve Act, which states that board members will be appointed by the president to 14-year terms and can be terminated by the president, but only for “cause.”
A federal judge...
A former manager shares how an assistant orchestrated his sudden firing with false complaints, only to later contact him asking for a letter of recommendation. Reddit users weighed in on how to han...