WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court has granted President Donald Trump the authority to fire members of two independent federal agencies, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). This decision, made on Thursday, allows the Trump administration to proceed with the firings while legal challenges continue.

The court's ruling pauses lower court decisions that had previously blocked Trump's removals of Gwynne Wilcox from the NLRB and Cathy Harris from the MSPB. The Supreme Court's unsigned order stated, "Because the Constitution vests the executive power in the President, he may remove without cause executive officers who exercise that power on his behalf, subject to narrow exceptions recognized by our precedents."

The court emphasized that the government is likely to demonstrate that both the NLRB and MSPB wield significant executive power. However, the justices did not make a final determination on whether these agencies fall under the recognized exceptions to presidential removal powers, indicating that this question will be addressed later in the legal process.

The decision was not unanimous. Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented. Justice Kagan expressed concern that the court's ruling effectively undermines a key 1935 precedent, Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, which established protections for independent agencies from direct presidential control. Kagan stated, "Not since the 1950s has a President, without a legitimate reason, tried to remove an officer from a classic independent agency. Today, this Court effectively blesses those deeds. I would not."

The Supreme Court's ruling comes amid ongoing tensions regarding the independence of federal agencies. The court made a notable distinction regarding the Federal Reserve, suggesting that the same legal reasoning applied to the NLRB and MSPB would not extend to the Fed. The court described the Federal Reserve as a "uniquely structured, quasi-private entity" with its own historical context.

This clarification may ease concerns in global markets, which were unsettled by Trump's previous criticisms of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell. Trump had publicly expressed a desire to fire Powell, stating on social media that the chair's "termination cannot come fast enough!" However, he later retracted this statement, claiming he had "no intention" of dismissing Powell.

The legal battle over the firings of Wilcox and Harris has been contentious. Both officials were appointed by President Joe Biden and argued that their removals violated laws that limit presidential authority to fire them without cause. They successfully challenged their firings in lower courts, which ruled in their favor, allowing them to remain in their positions while the litigation continued.

The Trump administration's Solicitor General, D. John Sauer, argued that the president should not be compelled to delegate executive power to agency heads who oppose his policy objectives. He contended that the NLRB and MSPB do not fall under the exceptions established by the Supreme Court in 1935, which allowed Congress to impose for-cause removal protections for multi-member commissions.

The implications of this ruling could extend beyond the NLRB and MSPB, raising questions about the president's authority over other independent agencies, including the Federal Reserve. Legal experts warn that if the Supreme Court endorses the Trump administration's position, it could jeopardize the independence of various federal entities.

As the legal proceedings unfold, the status of Wilcox and Harris remains uncertain. Their cases highlight the ongoing debate over the balance of power between the presidency and independent federal agencies, a topic that continues to generate significant legal and political discourse.