Instant Reaction: Supreme Court Blocks Trump from Firing Fed's Lisa Cook

Summary

---

Bloomberg Talks: Instant Reaction — Supreme Court Blocks Trump from Firing Fed's Lisa Cook

Date: June 29, 2026
Host: Paul (Bloomberg)
Guests: June Grasso (Legal Analyst), Elliot Stein (Litigation Analyst), Tyler Kendall (Chief Washington Correspondent), Gautam Mukunda (Yale School of Management, Bloomberg Opinion Contributor)

---

Overview of the Episode

This special Bloomberg Talks episode offers immediate analysis of a landmark set of Supreme Court rulings on presidential power over agency officials, particularly focusing on the attempted removal of Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook by President Trump. The Supreme Court's decision preserves Cook's position—for now—while dramatically expanding executive authority to dismiss leaders of other independent agencies. The episode unpacks the legal significance, political consequences, and market reactions, featuring in-depth commentary from Bloomberg legal and policy experts.

---

Key Discussion Points

1. The Supreme Court Decision on Lisa Cook

• Summary: The Supreme Court has ruled that President Trump cannot immediately remove Lisa Cook, a Federal Reserve governor, over allegations of mortgage fraud.

  • Key Reason: Cook was denied due process; there was no hearing or opportunity for her to respond to the allegations before the attempted dismissal.
  • Quote:

    “So Lisa Cook, as you know, Federal Reserve governor and Donald Trump tried to fire her on the basis of allegations of mortgage fraud. So there was no any kind of procedure at all before he said that.”
    — June Grasso (02:07)

• Current Status: Cook remains in her role “for now,” pending further litigation. The ruling doesn’t decide on the substance of the charges.

• Process Implications:

  • The Supreme Court underscores the need for notice and an opportunity to be heard in such removals.
  • Her case returns to lower courts for proceedings, should the White House choose to continue.

  “The real important part of the ruling is that they said the for cause removal restriction requires that she have some sort of notice and opportunity to be heard, which the president and the administration did not offer her.”
  — Elliot Stein (10:31)

2. Expansion of Presidential Power over Agencies

• Contrasting Ruling: On the same day, SCOTUS green-lights the President’s power to remove heads of other independent agencies, such as the FTC, exemplified by the decision allowing the firing of Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter.

• The Legal Backdrop: This effectively ends the precedent set by Humphrey’s Executor, a 90-year-old case that shielded independent agency leaders from at-will removal by the President.

  "They've done away with Humphrey's executor... which was that there was no ability for them to fire people at the head of agencies. And they've been cutting back on that bit by bit by bit. And now they appear to have gotten rid of it..."
  — June Grasso (02:53)

• Implications for Agency Independence: Agency heads not at the Fed are now more vulnerable to removal for political reasons, raising concerns about political interference.

  “If the President doesn't like what you're doing, you’re fired... But it's a huge win. And this court, as you know, has been expanding presidential power over and over again.”
  — June Grasso (06:28)

3. The Uniqueness of the Federal Reserve

• Why Different?: Both analysts and the Court recognize the unique structure and critical independence of the Fed as a rationale for not treating it the same as other agencies.

  “The striking thing about it is the extent to which the court has basically just abandoned jurisprudence and is saying, we like the Federal Reserve. We think it's really important. So we're going to treat it as a special case…”
  — Gautam Mukunda (27:25)

• Potential Precedent for Chair Jay Powell: Observers wonder if this logic will apply to Jerome Powell, potentially shielding him from summary removal as well.

  “If Lisa Cook was removed, it would, quote, weaken it, if not shatter the independence of the Fed.”
  — as cited by Tyler Kendall quoting Justice Kavanaugh (22:52)

4. Market and Political Reactions

• Market Fluctuations: Stocks pared gains in reaction to the ruling, reflecting uncertainty around central bank independence.
  • S&P, Dow, NASDAQ saw modest gains; Russell 2000 slipped 1.1% around the news. (07:16)
• Elizabeth Warren Reacts: The Massachusetts senator vows to "keep fighting back against attacks on the Fed” following the decision upholding Cook’s due process. (15:41)

5. Mail-In Ballot Decision

• SCOTUS lets stand rules in ~20 states allowing mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted for up to five days after—a defeat for President Trump.

  “That was a surprise, actually, the ballot case... So that's actually a big decision, and it is a surprise.”
  — June Grasso (08:38)

• Political Context: Seen as significant headed into the midterm elections.

6. E. Jean Carroll Civil Case

• SCOTUS leaves in place a $5 million jury award against Trump for sexual assault and defamation against E. Jean Carroll, dealing him another legal setback. (24:17)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Agency Independence

  “This court just believes in presidential power. And one has to wonder when the next president comes in, if they're not Republican, what, whether they'll start cutting back on presidential power.”
  — June Grasso (06:28)

• On Unitary Executive Theory

  “The unitary executive theory is something that was invented quite recently, really, in the 1970s. If you'd taken it to one of the founders, they would have just been baffled. …If the unitary executive theory was true, then it would be a power of the president to order inspector generals to cover up for his own crimes.”
  — Gautam Mukunda (28:22)

• On Political Ramifications

  “It's a win for the executive branch because the next president who comes in can fire any commissioner of an independent agency appointed by a Republican that they don't like.”
  — Elliot Stein (14:31)

• On the Unresolved Nature of the Cook Case

  “This story is not over. We just ended one chapter.”
  — Gautam Mukunda (29:31)

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [01:37] Breaking news: overview of the Supreme Court rulings
• [02:07] June Grasso outlines the Lisa Cook decision and legal context
• [04:25] Clarifying the “for now” nature of Cook’s position
• [06:22] Risks to agency independence and the unitary executive theory
• [08:38] June Grasso on the mail-in ballot case surprise
• [10:31] Elliot Stein explains the court’s process requirements for dismissal
• [13:21] Distinction between the Fed and other agencies; overrule of Humphrey’s Executor
• [14:27] Analysts discuss the broad impact and win for the executive branch
• [17:06] Implications for current agency heads and loss of dissenting voices
• [22:52] Tyler Kendall reports from the Supreme Court, quotes Justice Kavanaugh on Fed independence
• [24:17] Update on the E. Jean Carroll case and pending presidency response
• [27:25] Gautam Mukunda critiques the “special” status of the Fed
• [28:22] Mukunda explains and critiques the unitary executive theory
• [29:31] Next steps: the ongoing legal saga for Lisa Cook

---

Expert Analysis & Perspectives

Legal Significance

• The Supreme Court elevates executive branch power but preserves a carve-out protecting central bank independence.
• The overruling of Humphrey’s Executor marks a sea change in the relationship between the White House and agencies.

Political & Market Implications

• Today's decisions may embolden presidential efforts to remake the federal bureaucracy but reinforce the notion that the Federal Reserve is institutionally distinct.
• Political reactions are swift and polarized, with both parties eyeing the new powers for future use.

---

Concluding Takeaway

This episode captures a watershed moment in U.S. separation of powers. The Supreme Court has advanced the cause of a powerful—potentially unchecked—executive, with the Federal Reserve standing as a rare exception. The conversation hints at profound future consequences for American governance, financial markets, and the ever-shifting balance between the presidency and the nation’s regulatory machinery.

---

Transcript

[Paul]

Looking for more investing options? Meet cboe, the exchange that pioneered options trading. With exclusive trading products like VIX and SPX options, CBO can help you trade in any market environment. There are risks associated with CBOE Company products. Review the disclosures and [e-mail] USDISclaimers so

[Elliot Stein]

there's a lot of noise about AI, but time's too tight for more promises. So let's talk about results. At IBM, we work with our employees to integrate technology right into the systems they need. Now a Global workforce of 300,000 can use AI to fill their HR questions. Resolving 94% of common questions, not noise. Proof of how we can help companies get smarter by putting AI where it actually pays off, deep in the work that moves the business. Let's create smarter business IBM okay, before

[Paul]

we get into it, little side note for the IT leaders listening in, I was reading up on a Microsoft Commission survey the other day and learned that teams using Windows 11 Pro PCs report 62% fewer fewer security incidents compared to Windows 10 PCs, including three times fewer firmware attacks. Pretty significant. With security built in, you'll have AI ready IT that sets you up for operational efficiency as well as long term resilience. Upgrade to Windows 11 Pro at Windows means business.com

[Paul (Host)]

Bloomberg Audio Studios podcasts Radio

[Elliot Stein]

news

[Paul]

this is a breaking news update from Bloomberg. Instant reaction and analysis from our 3,000 journalists and analysts around the world.

[Paul (Host)]

Paul, we have some breaking news. The Supreme Court, of course, publishing its opinions today. It has expanded the president's power to fire top officials. It refuses to let the president immediately oust Lisa Cook, however, and Lisa Cook is now currently allowed to stay in the job for now.

[Paul]

All right, let's bring in June Grasso, Bloomberg's legal analyst here. She joins us here in studio. Let's start with the Lisa Cook decision here. June, can you summarize what's going on here?

[June Grasso]

So Lisa Cook, as you know, Federal Reserve governor and Donald Trump tried to fire her on the basis of allegations of mortgage fraud. So there was no any kind of procedure at all before he said that. So during the oral arguments, it was pretty clear that the Supreme Court justices were going to vote with Lisa Cook and not allow Trump to do that because of the status of the Federal Reserve. And during the oral arguments, there are a lot of questions by the conservatives as well about, you know, why was there no process here? She had absolutely no process. What would it take for you to have some kind of a hearing at least before this happens? So there was concern on their part And Justice Brett Kavanaugh had said prior to that that the Fed is different. Was expected. Now, as far as the Slaughter case, where she's on the ftc, they say that that's different and because it's not the Fed. But what this does is this really expands presidential power. It means that the President has the authority to fire people at the top of what, like 20 agencies or so. And what they've done here is they've done away with Humphrey's executor, which was a decision which is standing for about 70 years, I think, about the ability of presidents to fire people, which was that there was no ability for them to fire people at the head of agencies. And they've been cutting back on that bit by bit by bit. And now they appear to have gotten rid of it since they, I haven't read the opinion yet. Obviously, since they're, they're allowing the Slaughter to be fired. And one more thing, too, if you notice this week what's happening and last week what's been happening is that they're, they're releasing opinions at the same time that have to do with the similar issue. And what I think is happening, too is the, it used to be that all the big decisions were loaded to the very end the last day, but now we're seeing big decisions this week and last week. And I think the chief is trying to mix it up so we don't have a day on the last day of the opinion. And there were five, six, you know, there were five, six to three decisions and they were all in these big cases. So I think that that's what's happening happening here.

[Paul (Host)]

So let me just make sure I understand. The Supreme Court ruled that Lisa Cook, a Federal Reserve governor, can stay in her job for now.

[Paul]

What's for now mean?

[Paul (Host)]

That's a, that's a good question. But it's while litigation continues. Right, right, right.

[June Grasso]

So, yeah, because they've had no litigation at all. He just said, you're, you know, hello, I want to.

[Paul (Host)]

So she's getting her due process, in other words.

[June Grasso]

Well, I assume that we have to see what, what the, what the President does now. Are they going to go forward with this? Are they going to bother to go forward with this and have it litigated? And she's got one of the best Supreme Court litigators around, the former former Solicitor General, Paul Clement, who is just really, his record at the Supreme Court is phenomenal. And I think he is the one who has argued the most cases at the court. And you can see the deference the justices pay to him when he's arguing. So I mean, that will go on, her litigation will go on to, you know, to stop this. But you know, by the time, who knows, by the time it gets done, Trump could be out of office. I mean, the way these things drag on.

[Paul (Host)]

So the President's efforts to push her out of the central bank's board, that is not.

[June Grasso]

That failed.

[Paul (Host)]

That failed.

[June Grasso]

Yeah, but.

[Paul (Host)]

And you were saying that his ability to oust other government agency leaders. Yeah, this has been expanded.

[June Grasso]

Right. This is all part of the theory called the unitary executive theory. I don't know if you've heard about it, but it's like that, this people who believe that the power of the executive branch should be in the President. So all these agencies are executive branch agenc. So the President should have the ability to fire the people who are in charge of the executive branch agencies. But I mean, the Fed is different. The Fed is different. But I mean, so with a, with a, with the normal President or the prior presidents, you wouldn't worry about what was going to happen because there wouldn't be a wholesale, you're fired. But you know, this opens the door and people have been worried about them doing away with that Humphreys executor opinion.

[Paul]

And so the risk there is that these agencies perhaps lose some of their independence.

[June Grasso]

Yes, yeah, yeah. Because you know, if, if the President doesn't like what you're doing, you're fired. You know, but I mean, in reality he, he is controlling. He has put most people in those agency heads. Right. Talking about the FCC and things like that. So I don't know that they'll see anything happening right away, but it's a huge win. And this court, as you know, has been expanding presidential power over and over again. I mean, you decisions where, you know, nothing the President does in office, in his duties, can he be prosecuted for or so I mean, this court just believes in presidential power. And one has to wonder when the next president comes in, if they're not Republican, what, whether they'll start cutting back on presidential power. I mean, I think it's worth noting

[Paul (Host)]

here that stocks fell to session lows, or maybe not fall. They pared their gains and were at session lows right around the time that this opinion was published. They've come back a little bit and we're looking at modest gains in the S and p, Dow and Nasdaq. The Russell 2000 is lower by 1.1%. So among the headlines that we got is the Supreme Court Letting Lisa Cook, a Federal Reserve governor, stay in her job. This is a case that really tested the central bank's independence from the White House. So this is a defeat for the President's efforts to oust her over these mortgage fraud allegations. At the same time, we also heard that the Supreme Court has basically said that the mail in ballots can arrive after Election Day. That's another defeat for the president. And certainly this is relevant given that we're at a midyear elect, midterm election year, on the other hand, and June, this is where it gets a little complicated. The other government agencies are not seen as independent, really, because the president can let go of whoever he wants to.

[June Grasso]

Yeah. And I, you know, I'm trying to pull up the opinion just to see what they're, you know, how they, how they parsed out these two, these two cases. But I'm not getting it. I'm not getting it, I guess. Refresh, refresh.

[Paul]

How about this? Mail it, this ballot case? Just give us your thoughts on that.

[June Grasso]

That was a, that was a surprise, actually, the ballot case, because that's about Mississippi has a law, as do more than 20 other states, that as long as the ballot is postmarked by Election Day, it can come in five days, up to five days after, and it'll still be counted. So the Republicans were against this. Obviously, President Trump is against this and any kind of mail in ballots. And during the oral arguments, a lot of the conservatives seem to be in favor it, although the Chief justice and Justice Barrett were wondering, well, would this affect. What about states that have all mail in ballots if we say that. So the argument is in. The Constitution says Election Day is this day, so you shouldn't be extending it any further. Well, if you can't extend it further, then can you go, you know, can you also say, well, they can come in ahead of time. So I think that was part of the reasoning and Justice Barrett wrote the opinion. But so that's a huge surprise. And it was five to four. And so the most conservative in the no column. And so that's big because that could have affected the elections, the midterms coming up in so many states, more than 20. So that's actually a big decision, and it is a surprise.

[Paul]

Okay, very good, June. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. June Grasso is a legal analyst for Bloomberg News. We'll let her go back and do that lawyer thing, like actually read the.

[Paul (Host)]

I know we put her in an unfair position because she, she was working without the text.

[Paul]

I just want the AI like Cliff Notes.

[June Grasso]

Thanks a lot. I'll be leaving one.

[Paul]

One pager. Thanks so much. We appreciate that, as always. Let's go to Elliot Stein, litigation analyst for Bloomberg Intelligence. Elliot, I want to go to the Lisa Cook case for me for now. What does for now mean? That she can stay in her job for now?

[Elliot Stein]

Yeah, exactly. Well, this whole appeal was based on a preliminary ruling by the trial court earlier in the case saying that she could stay in her position while the rest of the case would continue. And so that's really the issue that the Supreme Court was looking at. And they said, yes, she can stay in her position, but the real important part of the ruling is that they said the for cause removal restriction requires that she have some sort of notice and opportunity to be heard, which the president and the administration did not offer her. So that that's sort of the crux of the ruling.

[Paul (Host)]

Okay, so her litigation can continue or the White House's litigation can continue as well. Who hears, who hears out this case?

[Elliot Stein]

So this will go back to the lower courts. And I should preface this by saying I haven't read the full decision. I read the brief summary you referenced. You know, you want AI, but the Supreme Court sort of gives you a brief summary at the beginning of the opinion, which I skimmed. But I think the way it's going to proceed is that it will be sent back down to the trial court for them to issue a final ruling. But the administration, presumably, if they want, will have to offer her some sort of notice and opportunity to be heard if they want to be able to continue to try to fire her. Otherwise, the trial court is going to rule in her favor.

[Paul]

So to the extent the administration wanted to extend litigation, what it's been known to do in the past, what's a timeline for a case like this? Because I'm wondering, does she have to worry about, you know, is this something that could take drag on for years, in which case the Trump administration will, you know, end or how does that.

[Elliot Stein]

Yeah, I mean, it's a little unclear exactly how it's going to proceed. Presumably, if the Trump administration continues to want to remove her from the Fed based on these accusations of mortgage fraud, they'll have to have some sort of proceeding, not a full trial, but some sort of like administrative proceeding where she can present. If the administration doesn't want to do that, the case is essentially over. The trial court will rule in her favor and say there was no notice and opportunity to be heard pursuant to what the Supreme Court said this morning.

[Paul (Host)]

Okay, so is the Supreme Court's role in Lisa Cook. Done.

[Elliot Stein]

For now. For now. It could always come back later. Cuz I don't know if we have real resolution on substantively what cause requires. Right. We sort of know now procedurally what it requires. I'm not sure the Supreme Court, I haven't read the full opinion again and I'm not sure they got into the actual definition of what for cause requires substantively.

[Paul (Host)]

Okay. What does this say about how the Supreme Court views the Federal Reserve versus other government agencies?

[Elliot Stein]

Yeah, this is a very good point because the other opinion, one of the other opinions that they issued, but simultaneously with the Cook decision was the Rebecca Slaughter opinion. She was an FTC commissioner. As you recall, President Trump fired multiple commissioners from independent agencies who were appointed by Democrats. For the most part, she challenged that, as did many other commissioners. And the Supreme Court early on sort of hinted that the President would be able to fire these other commissioners of independent agencies. But the Federal Reserve is different and we saw that very clearly today because the Supreme Court said that the President could indeed fire Rebecca Slaughter and other independent commissioners. I haven't read that opinion either, but presumably they overruled the Humphreys executor decision from 90 years ago which established that the four cause removal restriction was constitutional for independent agencies. I suspect now they're going to say it's unconstitutional.

[Paul]

I feel like this today was a win. I think that Slaughter case is huge.

[Elliot Stein]

The Slaughter case is a big deal. It's absolutely a big deal.

[Paul]

It can reshape the.

[Elliot Stein]

Yeah, but that's not just a win for Trump. That's a win for the executive branch because the next president who comes in can fire any commissioner of an independent agency appointed by a Republican that they don't like.

[Paul]

So better way to phrase that. It's a win for the executive branch.

[Paul (Host)]

Yeah.

[Elliot Stein]

And he's going to be very upset about the Lisa Cook decision. And also he, in an earlier order it sounded like he lost his cert petition on the mail in balance. And on the mail in balance.

[Paul]

And the Jean Carroll case.

[Elliot Stein]

Right, exactly.

[Paul]

There's a lot going on.

[Elliot Stein]

So net. Net. He's probably going to be angry this afternoon,

[Paul]

though. I'm not sure. I mean, so now the question for a lot of just scholars, constitutional scholars, is, isn't it? Aren't these agencies their ability to be independent? Isn't that a good thing? And I guess that's the debate, Ron.

[Elliot Stein]

So you have to balance that on the one hand versus this theory called the unitary executive theory, that the President should be able to hire and fire anyone he wants in the executive branch and that he oversees the entire executive branch. And if you have these independent commissioners that the President can't fire, you almost have this fourth branch of government. That's the counter argument.

[Paul]

Interesting. Okay.

[Paul (Host)]

We have some comments from Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. She is commenting on the Lisa Cook Supreme Court decision, says we'll keep fighting back against attacks on the Fed. She also talks about Bill Pulte and how he can't be trusted, should be removed. But that's separate from, again, her comments on Lisa Cook and how, according to Senator Warren, she or her party will keep fighting back against these attacks on the Federal Reserve. What are the White House's options now? How does it move forward with Lisa Cook specifically?

[Elliot Stein]

Well, I think if they want to continue to go after her for these accusations of mortgage fraud, they can, but they'll have to have some sort of proceeding where she's allowed to present her defenses. I think that's basically it. It's unclear exactly what that looks like. The Supreme Court, in the brief summary that I was able to read before coming on, said it doesn't have to be a full blown trial, but they have to give her some opportunity to be heard and present her defenses.

[Paul (Host)]

And just to put some context on Senator Warren's comments about Bill Pulte, Bill Pulte was the one who brought up the fact that Lisa Cook perhaps had these misrepresented her mortgage application.

[Gautam Mukunda]

Right.

[Paul (Host)]

Because he was the head of the FHFA and he brought it to the President's attention. And that kind of got everything started, Paul, with this allegation of mortgage fraud.

[Paul]

So if I'm an agency head appointed by anybody other than Donald Trump, am I nervous about my job today?

[Elliot Stein]

Probably. But I think he's already fired most of the ones he wants to fire. I mean, I'm serious. Look at the cftc, you have one D of the chairman and that's it. No other commissioners. And so, you know, the effect of that is you don't have. You're probably not going to change the votes because you're always going to. It was always tradition that the chair would resign and let the incoming President appoint someone from his own party. But you're not going to have dissenting voices now to push back on the majority in these agencies. And I think that's really the big effect.

[Paul (Host)]

How much of this is a surprise? What surprises you about this string of decisions?

[Elliot Stein]

Nothing. This was exactly as we anticipated, that Humphrey's executor would be overruled. The president would be able to fire commissioners of independent agencies under the unitary executive theory. But the Supreme Court gave us hints as far back as last year that the Federal Reserve is different just based on it said it has a unique structure, a unique history. It's not. It's sort of this quasi private entity because it has a mix of being a government entity and also private sector members who or at least private sector members who vote in some of the regional banks presidents. So it didn't come as a surprise. We thought the Fed would be treated differently.

[Paul (Host)]

Mail in ballot Was that a surprise?

[Elliot Stein]

That's a little bit of a surprise. I don't follow that case. It doesn't have a huge, doesn't have a business impact.

[June Grasso]

Fair.

[Elliot Stein]

But yes, I would say it's a little bit of a surprise. And I think June probably touched on that earlier.

[Paul]

All right, good. Elliot Stein, Great stuff as always. Elliot Stein, Bloomberg Intelligence Litigation Analyst See that? Law school paid off totally. He started strong at Stanford and then he took a long term going to law school. I mean, I don't know.

[Paul (Host)]

He did that all without the benefit of reading the full text. So thank you Elliot for doing that.

[Paul]

Exactly when your options are limited, so are your opportunities. At cibo, the global exchange that pioneered options trading, we offer more ways to move with the market. From VIX and SPX options to global market data solutions. CBOE helps investors diversify, manage risk, and stay ahead of whatever the market does. Next life is better. With options, your investments could be too. There are risks associated with CBOE Company products. Review the disclosures and disclaimers at cbo.com usdisclaimers the thing about AI for business,

[Elliot Stein]

it may not automatically fit the way your business works. At IBM, we've seen this firsthand. But by embedding AI across hr, IT and procurement processes, we've reduced costs by millions, slash repetitive tasks, and freed thousands of hours for strategic work. Now we're helping companies get smarter by putting AI where it actually pays off, deep in the work that moves the business. Let's create smarter business.

[Paul]

IBM support for the show comes from public.com if you're actively involved in your portfolio, you probably catch yourself repeating the same actions. Buying the dip, manually sweeping idle cash, putting on a hedge on public. You can now create AI agents that handle all these tasks on your behalf. Just describe what you want to do in plain English, like if the Vix hits 25, buy a put option on the S&P 500. Or if my cash balance goes above $20,000, move the excess into my Direct Index. You approve the workflow and your agent handles the risk, monitoring the market, watching for your conditions and executing your strategies exactly as defined. An investing platform driven by your intent, not just your clicks. You can also get full read and write access to your account via the public API. Go to public.com market and fund your account in five minutes or less. That's public.com market paid for by Public Investing Brokerage Services by Open to the Public Investing Inc. Member FINRA and SIPC Advisory Services by Public Advisors, LLC, SEC registered advisor. Complete disclosures available at public.com disclosures Tyler Kendall joins us here. She is outside of the Supreme Court. She's a Blue Bloomberg News Washington correspondent. Tyler, what's the feeling, do you think within what do you think the takeaway will be from this president, from this administration about this busy, busy day of Supreme Court rulings?

[Tyler Kendall]

Well, by and large, Paul, the administration got a win when it comes to the Trump v. Slaughter case, essentially expanding the president's authority to remove independent heads of independent agencies. Rebecca Slaughter was the last Democratic commissioner on the Federal Trade Commission. So that is considered to be a win for the Trump administration, not necessarily a surprising decision. The the justices had been a little bit wary of the idea that the president wouldn't be able to remove officials that are accountable to the executive branch. But the Lisa Cook decision means that she can stay in her job, at least for now, which means that that legal fight does continue. The justices did not weigh in on whether or not they believed that the Trump administration's accusations rise to the level that Lisa Cook should be fired, which means this is still a STAY tuned situation. But by and large, that part of the decisions today does mark at least partially a setback for this White House.

[Paul (Host)]

So when it comes to Lisa Cook, I guess a lot of people are wondering what that means for Jay Powell because the former Fed chair had said that he would stay on the Federal Reserve Board until legal issues are resolved. And maybe Lisa Cook was one of them. But I guess the Fed renovation and the DOJ's action against the Fed and Jay Powell specifically is still it's still out there, isn't it?

[Tyler Kendall]

Yeah. And it could come back up. There were a few different threads that we were watching in this case, Scarlett. One is the idea of equities, basically that the justices were looking into what the broad range impacts would be when it comes to the Federal Reserve and what would happen to the US Economy if a governor was removed. And I bring that up because we heard this be one of the main arguments from One of the conservative justices, Brett Kavanaugh, his line of questioning back when this case was heard in January, very much focused on this. I'm trying to find the quote at the time. He said that if Lisa Cook was removed, it would, quote, weaken it, if not shatter the independence of the Fed. And today the decision was 5, 4. And that included Brett Kavanaugh siding with the liberal justices on this court in favor of Lisa Cook being able to keep her job for now. So that's probably a thread that would make its way through if a case against Powell ultimately came up. And the second is the idea that Lisa Cook wasn't given essentially due process in responding to the allegations against her before she was fired. You remember when all of this was happening and essentially she was fired via a tweet from President Trump without much chance to respond to the allegations that were posted on social media. So there are a lot of different factors in this case, but by and large it is taken to mean that the Supreme Court bolstered the independence of the central bank.

[Paul]

Tyler, we also had a ruling. Supreme Court earlier today left intact a jury's finding that Donald Trump sexually abused and defamed the writer E. Jean Carroll, putting her in line to collect a $5 million award from the president. What has the president commented on on this particular case?

[Tyler Kendall]

So we haven't heard from him yet today. And the justices didn't really provide much of an explanation for this decision. But this probably isn't going to be something that President Trump is too happy with. This does deal essentially a final blow to President Trump's efforts, efforts to end one of the most significant legal cases against him. It was another one that we were tracking closely, but it wasn't heard in the standard term of the Supreme Court. So it came out earlier this morning instead of with this ruling, instead we just got the Supreme Court decision, which means that President Trump is going to have to pay that $5 million judgment.

[Paul (Host)]

All in all, Tyler, what do you expect, expect in terms of the president's giving some kind of response? How does he usually respond to these kinds of decisions? Will it be on Truth Social, do you think? Do we expect him to hold a news conference, for instance? What will you be looking for?

[Tyler Kendall]

I would expect that we'll probably, we'll probably get a post out on Truth Social today. President Trump actually doesn't have any public events on his schedule. That doesn't mean that some of the closed door events couldn't open up. He does have a few different policy meetings that we're tracking closely today. But this case was one where President Trump was heavily involved in. We're also waiting likely later this week to get a decision on the other really console, consequential case that we're watching for, which is birthright citizenship. And I was actually here at the court back in April when President Trump came here, too. He very clearly wanted to make his opinion known when it comes to the justices trying to figure out the legality of his executive order that deals with ending automatic birthright citizenship. I would expect him to be very vocal when we get that decision, likely later this week. We could maybe see it early next week if the Supreme Court adds a date in early July. But we're really expecting that to be later this week. So it could potentially be two blows to the Trump administration's agenda when it comes to the Lisa Cook case and what appears to be a wariness around the Trump administration's argument related to birthright citizenship.

[Paul (Host)]

Oh, thank you for spinning it forward for us, Tyler. Tyler Kendall is our chief Washington correspondent, of course, giving us the latest with regards to the Supreme Court letting Lisa Cook, a Federal Reserve governor, stay in her job for now. We're going to get into what all of this means and what this means in terms of what the Fed looks like in, you know, now that the Supreme Court has made this ruling. Gautam Mukunda is lecturer at the Yale School of Management and a Bloomberg Opinion contributor. He writes regularly on issues of management, the intersection of policy and business. Got them. Your initial thoughts on this headline? The ruling from the Supreme Court that it has allowed Lisa Cook to stay in her job for now and it has pretty much signaled that the Federal Reserve is different than other government agencies.

[Elliot Stein]

Yeah.

[Gautam Mukunda]

It's not a surprising ruling because the court has already signaled that it thinks of the Federal Reserve as different. I think the striking thing about it is the extent to which the court has basically just abandoned jurisprudence and is saying, we like the Federal Reserve. We think it's really important. So we're going to treat it as a special case, whereas every other government agency. And they also announced day. Right. That this was another one of the rulings today that the president does have the power to fire FTC commissioners. Every other government agency gets treated like a pawn of the president. But somehow, for mystical reasons, we will not really specify the Federal Reserve is special. Okay. I guess it is.

[Paul]

We were informed by, you know, a couple of our guests, legal backgrounds that there's some theory out there that says, hey, you know, the universal kind of thing. I'm not sure. What it's called, but basically says the president should be able to do all this stuff. It's his or her administration. And so the president should be able to appoint who they want in these agencies.

[Gautam Mukunda]

Yeah. So the theory is the unitary executive. That's what they're referring to, is the idea that every single person in the executive branch is kind of like the fingers of the hand of the president. The unitary executive theory is something that was invented quite recently, really, in the 1970s. If you'd taken it to one of the founders, they would have just been baffled. But just to demonstrate how it breaks down so completely, Inspector general, inspectors general, the people whose job it is to identify fraud and, you know, tell us that, you know, the president or his or his appointees is stealing from the American public, are also members of the executive branch. So if the unitary executive theory was true, then it would be a power of the president to order inspector generals to cover up for his own crimes. If that makes sense to you, then you believe in the unitary executive.

[Paul]

Wow.

[Paul (Host)]

Okay. I had to think about that one for a little bit, but that is saying something. So this idea that the Federal Reserve is different, can the Trump administration do anything else in its quest to remake the Fed, or is this something where they kind of just have to call it an L and step back? How are you thinking this through?

[Gautam Mukunda]

Well, the ruling is a for now ruling. Right. So what they're presumably going to do is then continue on with the litigation against Lisa Cook in the hope of either winning a conviction or just, you know, draining her resources and her resolve to such an extent that she. That she steps down. I don't think either of those will work because the charges against her are on their face, quite absurd. And she doesn't seem like the sort of person who's going to back down in the face of this kind of an assault. But this story is not over. We just ended one chapter.

[Paul]

President Trump is out with a tweet just now, of course, as I'm sure you're not surprised, but basically touting the Slaughter case as a all caps, big win here. And really saying this is, you know, presidents have been trying to do this since the 1930s. Again, trying to put this into context, it seems like a win for not not just Donald Trump, but for the executive branch. But again, maybe it's a real loss for independence. It's tough. I'm not sure how you weigh those two things.

[Elliot Stein]

That's right.

[Gautam Mukunda]

So it is clearly the Supreme Court, and Chief Justice Roberts in particular, has a long history of just saying that he wants to concentrate power in the hands of the executive branch and in the hands of the court. And we should note, right, it's not just the executive branch, it's the court. Because the court has arrogated to itself the ability to say that we can't at any time make up rules that say that, hey, the executive branch doesn't have this power. But okay, so they've done that and they've contracted these powers into the court, into the court and to the executive branch. That is a big win. But there are two sets of questions here. One is, are these powers that this court is going to allocate to all presidents or is it just going to be presidents that it seems to like? And I don't think we know the answer to that yet. And second is, you know, a different president who had a much more ambitious view of what they wanted to do in policy. And I can tell you the Democrats are already talking about how they can use the powers that the court has given the executive when they take office, is going to use this in a very, very different way. Ways that I suspect Chief Justice Roberts is not going to like.

[Paul]

Okay, tech leaders Word on the street is security incidents are dropping way down with Window PCs built in. Security for the win. Upgrade to Windows 11 Pro at windows means business.com whatever your goal, trade show giveaways, client Gifts or Team Gear 4 imprint has the promo products to match. With thousands of options. From apparel and drinkware to tech and totes, it's easy to find the right fit for your brand and budget. With standout choices at every price point and with their 360 degree guarantee, you can be four imprint certain your order will show up just right, right on time. Explore more at 4imprint.com 4imprint for certain when you're running a business, the best days are the ones where priorities stay on track. For midsize and large companies, risk can affect multiple parts of the organization at once, from property and liability to cyber and regulatory challenges. At that level, managing risk becomes an ongoing discipline. At the Hartford, the focus is on helping businesses manage risk before it turns into something more disruptive. And when losses do happen, that work is paired with insurance coverage shaped by years of underwriting, risk engineering and claims experience. Learn [e-mail] riskmitigation policies provided by Hartford Fire Insurance Company and its property and casualty affiliates Hartford, Connecticut.