Supreme Court's slaughter ruling and presidential power (with Joe Matthew, Kailey Leinz)

Asks if Trump's characterization of the ruling as giving 'tremendous additional power' to the presidency is correct.

Kailey Leinz

Rebecca Kelly Slaughter

Yes, it's exactly right—and disturbing. It's a massive transfer of power from Congress to the president, transforming agencies meant to serve the people into instruments of the executive.

The overturned precedent (Humphrey's Executor) originally protected a pro-business Republican from FDR. It's not partisan; it's about ensuring independent oversight.

Asks what is lost if a president can fire anyone from a predecessor's administration.

Joe Matthew

Rebecca Kelly Slaughter

What's lost is the quality of debate and consensus-building. Having served under both Trump and Biden, I saw the benefit of engaging with different perspectives to find durable, stable decisions.

Without that, agencies swing wildly. The downstream consequence also decimates the civil service and career expertise built over centuries.

Asks about the narrow ruling on Lisa Cook's case at the Fed.

Joe Matthew

Rebecca Kelly Slaughter

Important distinction: Trump fired me for no cause (at will), but tried to fire Cook for cause (pretextual). The court said 'for cause' removal is valid for the Fed but not the FTC—an intellectually incoherent, outcome-oriented distinction.

Only two justices (Roberts and Kavanaugh) made this distinction; the others said all could be fired or none. It seems driven by protecting the Fed's economic role, not consumer watchdogs.

Asks what advice she would give if a Democrat is in the White House next.

Kailey Leinz

Rebecca Kelly Slaughter

Congress must reassert its authority—oversight, power of the purse, nominations process. Elect members from both parties willing to check an out-of-control executive. That's the first step to getting the system back on track.

SignalTube