Politics
Supreme Court appears ready to keep Lisa Cook on Federal Reserve board despite Trump efforts to fire her
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
The Supreme Court appeared poised to give President Donald Trump one of his biggest legal setbacks in office, offering strong support Wednesday for Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook remaining in her leadership position — at least for now.
The justices debated in their packed courtroom whether Trump has broad unilateral executive authority to fire someone from the central bank, despite its special status as a stand-alone federal agency.
During nearly two hours of oral arguments, a majority seemed to agree the Fed’s unique public-private hybrid structure limited removal without clear “cause,” and that Trump did not meet his legal obligations when seeking Cook’s dismissal for alleged private mortgage fraud.
REPUBLICAN SENATOR VOWS TO BLOCK TRUMP FED NOMINEE OVER POWELL INVESTIGATION
Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook and attorney Abbe Lowell, arrive at the Supreme Court in Washington, Wednesday, Jan. 21, 2026. (Mark Schiefelbein/AP Photo)
The case comes before the Supreme Court on an emergency basis — with the government seeking to dismiss Cook now, for as long as the courts decide the matter, a process that could last months.
The justices could decide the larger constitutional questions now or give the lower federal courts a chance for a full examination of the facts, with some guidance from the high court on the standards of “for cause” removal.
In arguments, most on the court seemed skeptical of Trump’s actions.
“That’s your position that there’s no judicial review, no process required, no remedy available?” Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked Solicitor General D. John Sauer. “Very low bar for cause that the president alone determines. And that would weaken, if not shatter, the independence of the Federal Reserve.”
“Let’s talk about the real-world downstream effects of this. Because if this were set as a precedent, it seems to me just thinking big picture, what goes around, comes around,” added Kavanaugh, who has typically been an ardent defender of executive power. “All the current president’s appointees would likely be removed for cause on January 20th, 2029 — if there’s a Democratic president or January 20th, 2033. And then, we’re really at, at will removal.”
Others on the bench raised questions of “public confidence” if the president could fire Fed governors without fully explaining or justifying the reasons.
“We have amicus briefs from economists who tell us that if Governor Cook is” fired, asked Justice Amy Coney Barrett, “that it can trigger a recession. How should we think about the public interest in a case like this?”
The Competing Arguments
Cook’s lawyer told the nine-member bench court the Federal Reserve System was created by Congress in 1913 as a wholly independent entity, to insulate it from political influence, and from any one president “stacking the deck” with their own nominees.
The first Black female Fed governor claims to be a political pawn in Trump’s very public efforts to dictate the board’s interest rate policies and by exploiting what she calls “manufactured charges” of wrongdoing.
GOP SENATOR SUGGESTS FED CHAIR POWELL RESIGN NOW TO DODGE POTENTIAL CRIMINAL INDICTMENT
President Donald Trump speaks with Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell (R) as he visits the Federal Reserve in Washington, D.C., on July 24, 2025.
With Cook in the audience as a show of support was Fed Chairman Jerome Powell, whom Trump has also sought to remove in a broader, ongoing feud with the agency over the pace of lowering benchmark interest rates to spur the domestic economy.
But the Trump Justice Department said he had executive authority to seek Cook’s removal, free from judicial review.
Independent Agency Review
The conservative court has allowed much of Trump’s challenged executive actions to be enforced at least temporarily — including upholding firings of members of the National Labor Relations Board, the Merit Systems Protection Board, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the Federal Trade Commission, despite federal laws protecting them against removal without good cause.
The justices last month heard arguments in a separate case, on Trump’s efforts to remove Democrat-appointed Rebecca Slaughter from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which, like the Fed, is a congressionally-created independent, multi-member regulatory agency.
The 6-3 conservative majority in that petition appeared ready to rule for the president when it involves semi-autonomous agencies like the FTC.
But in the Federal Reserve dispute, the high court clearly indicated this institution was different.
In the Cook case, lower courts ruled she did not receive due process when the president tried to fire her.
The current posture of the case is whether Trump can remove Cook — at least temporarily — while the dispute continues to play out on the merits.
The “for cause” removal restriction’s constitutionality is not directly before the justices, but nevertheless played a key role in the oral argument session.
The Supreme Court could go ahead and settle the competing issues now — which seems unlikely — or leave it to the lower courts to continue hearing the appeal, with guidance on how to proceed.
Focus on the Fed
Though its leaders are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, the seven-member board is considered an independent government agency, since its monetary policy decisions do not need presidential or legislative approval. But the agency does provide Congress with regular reports on its work.
It also does not receive any federal funding, and the terms of the members of the board of governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms.
Under law, the Federal Reserve’s leadership has a three-fold mandate: “maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates.”
The 12 Federal Reserve Banks are not part of the federal government, but set up like private corporations, and regionally located across the country.
In arguments, most justices agreed Cook deserved some chance to make her case that a dismissal would be improper.
SUPREME COURT PREPARES FOR MAJOR TEST OF PRESIDENTIAL POWER IN TRUMP EFFORTS TO FIRE FEDERAL RESERVE GOVERNOR
The Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)
“Why are you afraid of a hearing?” asked Justice Amy Coney Barrett, at one point.
Justice Neil Gorsuch asked: “Let’s, just suppose with me, hypothetically, for the moment, that the court read the act to require notice and a hearing … What would that hearing look like?”
Gorsuch asked if the president could just call Cook into the White House Roosevelt Room. “So just a meeting across a conference table, finish with ‘you’re fired?’”
But Chief Justice John Roberts repeatedly said a hearing on the allegations would serve little use if her only defense is she made an “inadvertent error” on her mortgage application.
The public session also focused extensively on the standards of “cause” that would permit Cook’s dismissal. Several justices suggested the mortgage fraud claims against Cook were not serious enough to trigger emergency action requested by the government to remove her at least temporarily.
Existing statutory removal protections include the so-called “INM standard” — “inefficiency, neglect of malfeasance.”
“The question becomes, is it grossly negligent to make a mistake on a mortgage application?” said Justice Sonia Sotomayor.
Justice Samuel Alito also asked why the case was handled “in such a hurried manner,” suggesting concern the allegations against Cook have not been properly adjudicated, either by the courts or by the president himself.
In a statement after the hearing ended, Cook said her case is “about whether the Federal Reserve will set key interest rates guided by evidence and independent judgment or will succumb to political pressure.”
The Impact
The Federal Reserve Act (FRA) says the president can only remove members of the Fed board and FOMC “for cause.” The exact parameters of that standard were not spelled out in the original law, and never fully tested in the courts.
Cook — appointed for a 14-year term by former President Joe Biden in 2023 — will remain on the job at least until the court decides the current legal questions.
SUPREME COURT TEMPORARILY GREENLIGHTS FIRING OF BIDEN-APPOINTED FTC COMMISSIONER
Lisa DeNell Cook is sworn in during a Senate Banking nominations hearing on June 21, 2023, in Washington. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
No president has fired a sitting Fed governor in the law’s 112-year history.
She strongly denies accusations of falsely claiming two homes in Georgia and Michigan as her primary residence to secure better mortgage terms. She has not been charged with any crime.
Cook sued the administration last August in a bid to keep her job.
Just after the court arguments ended, Cook released a statement saying her case is “about whether the Federal Reserve will set key interest rates guided by evidence and independent judgment or will succumb to political pressure.”
The next Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting is scheduled for January 27 and 28, with an expected interest rate decision. Both Powell and Cook are each set to participate.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Financial markets, private banks, businesses, and investors will be closely watching what the Supreme Court does in the Federal Reserve dispute, and a separate pending appeal over Trump’s sweeping reciprocal global tariffs.
A written ruling in that import tax case, which was argued by the justices in November, could come at any time.
The Fed case is Trump v. Cook (25a312). A decision there could come relatively quickly within weeks, or potentially as late as June or early July.
Politics
Pope Leo sends unmistakable message on immigrants during visit honoring America’s first saint
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Pope Leo XIV used a visit Saturday honoring St. Frances Xavier Cabrini, the first American saint and patron saint of immigrants, to deliver his latest appeal on behalf of them, asking Catholics to look to her example at a time when migration remains one of the defining issues of his emerging papacy.
The remarks came as Leo continues to make migration a central focus of his public ministry, a position that has sparked months of public friction with President Donald Trump over immigration and foreign policy.
“What could be more relevant today than a missionary charism dedicated to serving migrants?” Leo said during an evening prayer service in Sant’Angelo Lodigiano, the northern Italian town where Cabrini was born.
The American-born pope prayed at Cabrini’s tomb and urged young Catholics to learn from the saint’s life of serving immigrants, many of whom had left their homelands in search of better opportunities.
POPE LEO XIV STRONGLY SUPPORTS US BISHOPS’ CONDEMNATION OF TRUMP IMMIGRATION RAIDS: ‘EXTREMELY DISRESPECTFUL’
Pope Leo XIV presides over a celebration at the parish of Santi Antonio Abate e Francesca Cabrini in Sant’Angelo Lodigiano, Italy, Saturday. The visit was part of his pastoral journey to nearby Pavia and marked the birthplace of Francesca Cabrini, the first U.S. saint and Patroness of Migrants. (Mario Tomassetti/Vatican Media)
But Leo also invoked his predecessor, Pope Francis, whose own papacy was defined in part by calls to welcome migrants.
“Let us ask ourselves: if Mother Francesca were alive today, what would her missionary spirit tell her?” Leo said. “And what would a pope like Francis — who, as the son of Italian immigrants, made service to migrants one of the key priorities of his pontificate — ask of her?”
The comments are the latest in a series of migration-focused appearances that have helped define Leo’s first year as pope.
POPE LEO APPOINTS PRO-IMMIGRATION BISHOP TO DIOCESE HOME TO TRUMP’S MAR-A-LAGO
Pope Leo XIV greets faithful as he leaves the parish of Santi Antonio Abate e Francesca Cabrini in Sant’Angelo Lodigiano, Italy, Saturday. (Mario Tomassetti/Vatican Media)
Last week, Leo traveled to Spain’s Canary Islands, a major destination for migrants departing West Africa, where he met migrants and called for greater efforts to welcome and integrate people fleeing hardship and conflict.
During that trip, Leo urged world leaders to create “legal and safe pathways” for migration and warned against reducing migrants to statistics.
Leo’s migration advocacy has frequently drawn criticism from Trump, who has accused the pontiff of venturing into politics and sharply disagreed with some of his comments on immigration and foreign affairs.
The public disagreements have become one of the most closely watched relationships between the Vatican and Washington during Leo’s papacy.
INCLUSIVE TONE OF NEW POPE ISN’T SITTING WELL WITH SOME IN THE ‘AMERICA FIRST’ MOVEMENT
Pope Leo XIV presides over a celebration at the parish of Santi Antonio Abate e Francesca Cabrini in Sant’Angelo Lodigiano, Italy, Saturday, during his pastoral journey to nearby Pavia. (Mario Tomassetti/Vatican Media)
Earlier this year, Reuters reported that Secretary of State Marco Rubio was expected to meet with Vatican officials and Italian leaders during a period of heightened tensions between the Holy See and the Trump administration.
Leo has rejected suggestions that his remarks are political attacks, arguing instead that his appeals stem from Catholic teaching on human dignity, peace and care for vulnerable people.
Saturday’s visit centered on Cabrini, who became a naturalized U.S. citizen and spent decades serving Italian immigrants through schools, hospitals and orphanages before her death in Chicago in 1917.
US CATHOLIC BISHOPS PRESIDENT SAYS DEPORTATIONS INSTILLING ‘FEAR’ IN ‘WIDESPREAD MANNER’: ‘CONCERNS US ALL’
Pope Leo XIV holds a private audience with Vice President J.D. Vance at the Apostolic Palace in Vatican City, May 19, 2025. (Simone Risoluti/Vatican Media)
The Vatican has also announced that Leo will travel to the Italian island of Lampedusa on July 4, a date likely to draw attention in the United States given the pope’s American roots.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Lampedusa has become one of Europe’s most recognizable migration flashpoints because of the thousands of migrants who attempt dangerous crossings from North Africa each year. The island also carries symbolic importance within the Catholic Church because it was the destination of Pope Francis’ first trip outside Rome after becoming pope in 2013.
Fox News Digital’s Eric Mack and Robert McGreevy, and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
For UFC boss Dana White, heavyweight Josh Hokit’s post-fight behavior at UFC Freedom 250 on Sunday crossed a line.
On Monday, the mixed martial arts promotion’s president and chief executive told Time reporter Sean Gregory via text he is “completely against saying nasty and false things about people’s families” in reference to Hokit’s tasteless comment about Michelle Obama. During the White House spectacle in front of President Trump and others, Hokit was interviewed after his technical-knockout victory over Derrick Lewis and propped up a false conspiracy about the former first lady, declaring “Michelle Obama is a man.”
Hokit, who has a history of making tasteless comments after his fights, including the same Obama jab, drew mixed reaction from the UFC Freedom 250 crowd — and also from social media users, with some repeating the false claim in the comments on Hokit’s Instagram page and others chiding it. White, who has panned Hokit’s remarks in the past, did so again.
“Everyone knows my position on free speech but I hate that kind of nonsense,” White’s text added.
Hokit insulted Obama months after Trump faced backlash in February for a racist social media video that depicted President Obama and the former first lady as apes. Amid mounting public criticism, the White House took down the video and blamed an unnamed aide.
Michelle Obama, clearly on Hokit’s mind on Sunday, was busy with other matters over the weekend: preparing with her husband to open their Obama Presidential Center in Chicago. The museum and library hosts its grand opening Thursday and will be open to the public Friday.
Times staff writer Ana Ceballos contributed to this report.
Politics
Trump says Iran missiles ‘aren’t the problem’ after White House made them central to war rationale
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
For months, senior Trump administration officials argued that Iran’s ballistic missile arsenal helped shield Tehran’s nuclear ambitions and was a key reason the U.S. launched Operation Epic Fury attacks on the country.
Now, President Donald Trump is suggesting Iran having missiles may not be a problem at all.
“If other countries have them, it’s a little bit unfair for them not to have some. If Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and they all have some, I would say that in relative proportion, I think it’s okay,” Trump said at the G7 international forum Wednesday. “Am I going to let Saudi Arabia have missiles, but (Iran) can’t have them? It doesn’t work that way.”
“Missiles aren’t the problem. They hurt a little location, but they don’t blow up the planet.”
“The Gulf nations will address the nonnuclear issues, as we’ll be talking about the ballistic missiles,” the president added. “And we’ll talk, also, about the terrorist proxies that they have that — we don’t want that to happen.”
A map displays the range of ballistic missiles fired from Iran, highlighting areas within reach. (Fox News)
ISRAELI OFFICIALS REPORTEDLY WARN IRAN’S BALLISTIC MISSILES COULD TRIGGER SOLO MILITARY ACTION AGAINST TEHRAN
Trump made the remarks while discussing whether Iran should be permitted to retain missile capabilities in a news conference at the G7 in Évian-les-Bains, France, just as details of the memorandum of understanding between the U.S. and Iran were being released.
The comments strike a much different tone than arguments repeatedly made by senior administration officials in recent months, who described Iran’s ballistic missile force as both a major threat to regional security and a protective shield for Iran’s nuclear program.
“Iran can never have a nuclear weapon, and we will not allow Iran to hide behind the immunity of a massive short-term ballistic missile inventory, or the ability to make them or launch them,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters in a press conference March 3. “What they are trying to do, and have been trying to do for a very long time, is build a conventional weapons capability as a shield to hide behind.”
TRUMP VOWS TO HIT IRAN ‘VERY HARD’ AFTER OBLITERATING NEARLY ’90 PERCENT’ OF REGIME MISSILES
Other senior officials repeatedly described degrading Iran’s missile capabilities as a central objective of Operation Epic Fury.
In remarks at the White House on March 2, days after the start of the operation, Trump said, “Our objectives are clear. First, we’re destroying Iran’s missile capabilities … and their capacity to produce brand new ones.”
War Secretary Pete Hegseth later said March 4 the mission was “laser-focused” on obliterating Iran’s missiles and the facilities that produce them, while White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the same day one of the administration’s primary goals was to “destroy the regime’s deadly ballistic missiles and completely raze their missile industry to the ground.”
Heavy weapons, including ballistic missiles, air defense systems and unmanned aerial vehicles, are displayed during the 44th anniversary of the eight-year war with Iraq, known as Holy Defense Week, at Baharestan Square in Tehran, Iran, on Sept. 25, 2024. (Photo by Fatemeh Bahrami/Anadolu via Getty Images)
Rubio repeatedly returned to the theme throughout the operation, arguing that degrading Iran’s missile force was necessary to prevent Iran from using conventional military power as cover for a future nuclear weapons program.
TRUMP SAYS US, ISRAEL SHATTERED IRANIAN MILITARY CAPABILITIES, PRESSES LEADERS TO SURRENDER: ‘CRY UNCLE’
“This is about very specific objectives,” Rubio told reporters on March 30. “The President laid them out on the first night of the operation… Here they are — you should write them down. Number one, the destruction of their air force. Number two, the destruction of their navy. Number three, the severe diminishing of their missile launching capability. And number four, the destruction of their factories so they can’t make more missiles and more drones to threaten us in the future. All of this so that they can never hide behind it to acquire a nuclear weapon. That was our objective from the beginning; that remains our objective now.”
Leavitt made similar comments the same day, saying the objectives of Operation Epic Fury included “destroying their ballistic missiles” and dismantling the infrastructure used to produce them while ensuring Iran never obtains a nuclear weapon.
Trump’s remarks at the G7 also raised questions about the administration’s approach to Iran’s nuclear program, another issue that administration officials had previously described in far less flexible terms.
Trump’s comments also come as the administration pursues a memorandum of understanding with Iran that leaves unresolved one of the central disputes in the nuclear negotiations: the future of Tehran’s enrichment program.
Under the framework agreement unveiled this week, the United States and Iran agreed to spend 60 days negotiating the fate of Iran’s nearly 900-pound stockpile of near-weapons-grade 60% enriched uranium and any future enrichment activities. Administration officials said the minimum outcome under discussion would involve down-blending the material under International Atomic Energy Agency supervision, while acknowledging that key details of a final agreement remain unsettled.
Officials described Iran’s willingness to dilute its stockpile as a significant concession, but also acknowledged that the memorandum does not resolve whether Iran will ultimately be permitted to retain any enrichment capability.
TRUMP REAFFIRMS HARD LINE ON IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL: ‘WILL NOT ALLOW ANY ENRICHMENT OF URANIUM’
President Donald Trump arrives for a gala dinner at the Versailles Palace in Versailles, France. (Nathan Laine/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Trump appeared to strike a more accommodating tone when discussing Iran’s access to nuclear power at the G7.
“It is a little hard, though, when you say that somebody wants it, other people have it, other, adjoining states have it. And you’re not letting them have it for purposes of electricity and things like that,” Trump said. “It’s always a little tough. You have to use a little common sense.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The administration had previously drawn a much harder line on Iran’s nuclear program. Special envoy Steve Witkoff said the United States could not allow Iran to retain “even 1 percent” enrichment capability, while White House officials repeatedly described the end of Iranian enrichment as a red line.
The White House referred back to Trump’s recent remarks on missiles when asked for additional comment. “
“We are going to let the President’s comments stand,” a State Department spokesperson said when asked for comment.
The Pentagon could not immediately be reached for comment.
-
Los Angeles, Ca1 hour agoKids, teens can enjoy free lunch at over 90 parks across Los Angeles
-
Detroit, MI1 hour agoMetro Detroit church hosts community event to support youth: “We’re here for you”
-
San Francisco, CA2 hours agoSan Francisco celebrates Black freedom at weekend Juneteenth parade: ‘We’re all people’
-
Dallas, TX2 hours agoRedesign debate intensifies as Dallas convention center faces costly delays
-
Miami, FL2 hours ago‘An insane memory’: New World Cup super hero plays in Miami but not with Messi
-
Boston, MA2 hours agoFAA investigates close call between two aircraft at intersecting runways at Boston Logan International Airport | CNN
-
Denver, CO2 hours agoProposed September 2026 Service Changes
-
Seattle, WA2 hours agoSeattle gets a heat wave and rain storm in the same week? – Emerald City Weather Blog
