Keep pulling the thread on Odd Lots.
A recent Supreme Court decision enhanced the president's ability to fire the heads of federal agencies.
A recent Supreme Court decision created an exception for the Federal Reserve, protecting its leadership from being fired by the president.
The Supreme Court's Cook decision, which upheld the Federal Reserve's independence, was a 5-4 ruling.
Only two Supreme Court justices, Roberts and Kavanaugh, support the current legal equilibrium where the FTC's leadership is not protected from presidential removal but the Federal Reserve's is.
The Humphreys Executor ruling established that Congress can limit the president's removal power for officers in agencies with quasi-judicial or quasi-legislative functions.
The Supreme Court's legal doctrine for the Federal Reserve's independence carve-out was imported from the Second Amendment case United States v. Rahimi.
The First Bank of the United States, which the Supreme Court cited as precedent for Federal Reserve independence, was an investor-owned commercial bank, not a government body with executive officers.
The Federal Reserve Board is funded by assessments on the Federal Reserve Banks, giving it complete autonomy from the congressional appropriations process.
Political actors associated with the Trump administration explicitly state their goal is to dismantle the administrative state, which they refer to as the "fourth branch of government."
The Federal Reserve's independence is now in a precarious state, making it an "endangered species" as potentially the only constitutionally permissible independent agency.
The current legal arrangement protecting the Federal Reserve's independence is an unstable equilibrium that is unlikely to outlast Justices Roberts and Kavanaugh.
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has stated that the Federal Reserve's independence should be eliminated.