Trump challenges presidential firing authority as The Federal Reserve (FED) independence faces judicial battle.

Former President Trump's team recently submitted an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court, seeking to overturn the legal framework of the "Humphrey's Executor" case that restricts the president's firing authority. This precedent, established in 1935, stipulates that the president does not have the authority to dismiss heads of independent agencies with quasi-judicial or quasi-legislative functions at will, with the original intention of protecting the political independence of agencies such as the SEC.

Recently, local courts have twice rejected Trump's attempts to dismiss two members of the administrative agency appointed by Biden, based on the spirit of this case. Trump's team emphasized in their appeal that the president should not be forced to retain agency heads who are contrary to policy direction, even if "the implementation of policies has caused irreversible damage" during the transition period.

Sayh Prakash, a legal expert at the University of Virginia, pointed out that this case may completely end the boundaries of presidential power established by Humphrey's case. Will Balde, a scholar at the University of Chicago, also predicted that the Supreme Court's conservative justices would "most likely" use it to reshape the structure of executive power. If the appeal is successful, it will not only clear the way for Trump to remove "dissident officials", but also shake the traditional protection mechanisms of independent institutions such as the Federal Reserve – which means that future presidents may break through the "Humphrey Firewall" and directly intervene in the central bank's personnel authority when monetary policy divergence intensifies.