Supreme Court Blocks Trump's Bid to Remove Fed Governor Lisa Cook in 5-4 Ruling

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that President Donald Trump does not have the authority to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook from the central bank, at least for now, delivering a 5-4 decision that preserves the central bank's institutional independence while leaving the broader legal question unresolved.

The court did not issue a final ruling on whether Trump will ultimately have the power to fire Cook or any other member of the Fed. Instead, it rejected the administration's bid to stay a lower federal court ruling that had prevented her termination while her lawsuit challenging the dismissal proceeds.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion for the majority, which included fellow conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh as well as the court's three liberal members — Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. The four remaining conservative justices dissented.

The majority found that the government would be unlikely to prevail on its arguments against the stay. It also faulted the administration's handling of the due-process question, noting what it called the government's "halfhearted contention that Cook in fact received due process," and stating that "at minimum, Cook was entitled to some explanation of the evidence at issue, some avenue for a response, and a deadline by which a response would be due."

Trump had claimed he sought to fire Cook over allegations of mortgage fraud made last summer by Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte — a claim Cook has adamantly denied. The dismissal came nearly nine months ago. Cook remained on the Fed's Board of Governors throughout that period after both a federal district court judge and the Supreme Court separately blocked her removal pending her lawsuit.

Cook and others have argued that Trump's real motivation was her refusal to vote for the interest rate cuts the president had repeatedly demanded from the Fed during the first nine months of his second term. Under the Federal Reserve Act, a president may remove a Fed governor only "for cause."

"This was never about mortgage documents signed years before I became a Federal Reserve governor," Cook said in a statement Monday. "It was an attempt to remove me on a manufactured pretext because I refused to bow to political pressure and continued to set interest rates based only on what would best serve the American people."

Cook added that Monday's ruling "affirms a principle that has underpinned sound economic stewardship for generations: that the Federal Reserve must make all its policy decisions guided by evidence and independent judgment, free from political interference."

The case drew sharp attention during oral arguments on January 21, when Justice Kavanaugh warned that the administration's position — that a president could fire any Fed governor for cause without being subject to judicial review — "would weaken, if not shatter, the independence of the Federal Reserve."

Cook is the first Black woman to serve as a Fed governor. She was appointed by former President Joe Biden.

The ruling does not close the underlying case. Cook's lawsuit challenging her dismissal continues in the lower courts, meaning the question of whether a president may remove a Fed governor for cause — and what that standard requires — remains unresolved. That outcome will carry significant implications for the structural independence of the Federal Reserve and, by extension, for U.S. monetary policy.