Trump v. Slaughter
No. 25-332 · October Term 2025 · Judicial Power · decided June 29, 2026
Decided: Trump won 6-3. The model was right.
Expected vote 6–3 for Trump. Chance of a unanimous ruling 21%. FantasySCOTUS crowd: 63% Trump. Prediction market: 89% Trump.
The case
President Trump fired Federal Trade Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, who then sued, arguing her removal was unlawful because the President did not cite a statutory cause. The district court sided with Slaughter, ordering her reinstatement and issuing an injunction against interference with her duties. The Supreme Court will now decide whether the FTC Commissioner's removal protections violate the separation of powers and if a federal court can prevent a person's removal from public office.
- Whether the statutory removal protections for FTC Commissioners infringe upon the President's executive power, potentially requiring the Court to reconsider the precedent set in *Humphrey's Executor v. United States*.
- Whether federal courts have the authority to issue equitable or legal relief to prevent a person's removal from public office, which touches on the judiciary's role in executive branch appointments and removals.
AI brief written by gemini-2.5-flash from the questions presented and the Oyez facts on 2026-10-02. Commentary only; it is not an input to the model.
Question presented, as filed
The parties are directed to brief and argue the following questions: (1) Whether the statutory removal protections for members of the Federal Trade Commission violate the separation of powers and, if so, whether Humphrey ’ s Executor v. United States , 295 U. S. 602 (1935), should be overruled. (2) Whether a federal court may prevent a person ’ s removal from public office, either through relief at equity or at law.
Facts of the case (Oyez)
Rebecca Kelly Slaughter was serving as a Commissioner on the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), an agency led by five commissioners appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate to seven-year terms. The Federal Trade Commission Act limits the President’s ability to remove an FTC Commissioner to “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” President Donald J. Trump fired Commissioner Slaughter, explaining her continued service was “inconsistent with [the] Administration’s priorities,” which did not meet the statutory standard of “cause.” Slaughter sued President Trump and the three remaining FTC Commissioners, arguing her removal was unlawful because the President failed to offer a statutory cause. The district court ruled in favor of Commissioner Slaughter, declaring her removal unlawful, ordering her reinstatement, and issuing a permanent injunction against the remaining Commissioners and their subordinates, barring them from interfering with her duties. The government appealed the decision and requested a stay of the district court's order pending the appeal. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit denied the government’s motion for a stay pending appeal and dissolved an administrative stay that had been previously entered. The Supreme Court granted the stay on September 22, 2025, and also granted certiorari.
The nine
Each justice's predicted vote and the record behind it: how often they have voted for the petitioner overall, in Judicial Power cases, and when the lower court ruled liberal; and, once argued, how many questions they put to each side (the side a justice questions more tends to lose their vote). The note under each row is the AI brief's reading, commentary rather than model input.
| Justice | Predicted | Overall | This issue | Lower court liberal | At argument | Voted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
John G. Roberts Republican appointee · since OT2005 Chief Justice Roberts often emphasizes institutional stability and the Court's role in maintaining the balance of powers, which could lead him to scrutinize the extent of presidential removal power while also considering the implications of overturning established precedent. | 71% Trump | 68% for the petitioner · 1,512 votes | 69% Judicial Power · 197 votes | 77% lower court liberal · 730 votes | 17 / 23 questions at Trump / Slaughter | Trump ✓ |
Clarence Thomas Republican appointee · since OT1991 Justice Thomas is a strong proponent of a unitary executive theory, which posits broad presidential control over the executive branch, making him likely to view statutory limitations on removal power with skepticism. | 88% Trump | 59% for the petitioner · 2,801 votes | 57% Judicial Power · 388 votes | 77% lower court liberal · 1,344 votes | 5 / 19 questions at Trump / Slaughter | Trump ✓ |
Samuel A. Alito Republican appointee · since OT2005 Justice Alito generally favors a robust view of presidential authority and has often sided with interpretations that enhance executive power, suggesting he would likely scrutinize limitations on the President's ability to remove executive officers. | 88% Trump | 62% for the petitioner · 1,469 votes | 65% Judicial Power · 190 votes | 79% lower court liberal · 699 votes | 8 / 22 questions at Trump / Slaughter | Trump ✓ |
Sonia Sotomayor Democratic appointee · since OT2009 Justice Sotomayor often emphasizes the importance of statutory text and congressional intent, and she may be inclined to uphold the established removal protections for independent agency officials, consistent with the *Humphrey's Executor* precedent. | 68% Slaughter | 61% for the petitioner · 1,192 votes | 58% Judicial Power · 149 votes | 48% lower court liberal · 560 votes | 23 / 6 questions at Trump / Slaughter | Slaughter ✓ |
Elena Kagan Democratic appointee · since OT2010 Justice Kagan, like Justice Sotomayor, often respects statutory frameworks and precedent, and she may be inclined to uphold the existing removal protections for independent agency commissioners, viewing them as a valid exercise of congressional power. | 68% Slaughter | 63% for the petitioner · 1,072 votes | 61% Judicial Power · 137 votes | 51% lower court liberal · 495 votes | 26 / 5 questions at Trump / Slaughter | Slaughter ✓ |
Neil M. Gorsuch Republican appointee · since OT2016 Justice Gorsuch often adheres to originalist interpretations of the Constitution and has expressed skepticism about the administrative state, which could lead him to question the constitutionality of statutory limits on presidential removal power as an infringement on executive authority. | 88% Trump | 65% for the petitioner · 592 votes | 69% Judicial Power · 83 votes | 75% lower court liberal · 278 votes | 9 / 54 questions at Trump / Slaughter | Trump ✓ |
Brett M. Kavanaugh Republican appointee · since OT2018 Justice Kavanaugh has generally supported a strong executive, and his jurisprudence often reflects a concern for the President's ability to control the executive branch, which could lead him to favor broader presidential removal powers. | 79% Trump | 69% for the petitioner · 498 votes | 73% Judicial Power · 62 votes | 77% lower court liberal · 235 votes | 15 / 36 questions at Trump / Slaughter | Trump ✓ |
Amy Coney Barrett Republican appointee · since OT2020 Justice Barrett's jurisprudence often emphasizes textualism and originalism, and she may carefully consider the historical understanding of presidential removal power and the separation of powers in evaluating the constitutionality of the FTC's removal protections. | 59% Trump | 66% for the petitioner · 360 votes | 71% Judicial Power · 49 votes | 76% lower court liberal · 168 votes | 10 / 10 questions at Trump / Slaughter | Trump ✓ |
Ketanji Brown Jackson Democratic appointee · since OT2022 Justice Jackson often considers the practical implications of legal rulings and the role of Congress in establishing agency structures, and she may be inclined to uphold the statutory removal protections for independent agency officials, consistent with established precedent. | 68% Slaughter | 59% for the petitioner · 244 votes | 60% Judicial Power · 37 votes | 38% lower court liberal · 108 votes | 19 / 9 questions at Trump / Slaughter | Slaughter ✓ |
Rates are each justice's own participation record in the Supreme Court Database, the same history the model trains on; a rate on fewer than five votes is not shown. The predicted vote is VotePredictor SCOTUS' per-justice probability from the served model, which also reads the bench-wide transcript signal and how long each side held the podium.
Every call this term, justice by justice · how the model is built and its record. Data as of 2026-10-02.