The U.S. Supreme Court declined to stop a lower court’s order blocking President Trump from removing a leading Library of Congress official on Tuesday.
The announcement came in the high court’s latest order list, in which the justices denied the Trump administration’s application to stay (“pause”) a September ruling by a three-judge panel on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. That decision sought to block the government from firing Shira Perlmutter, who led the U.S. Copyright Office in the Library of Congress until her termination in May.
As The Federalist previously reported, “Perlmutter’s dismissal came shortly after Trump removed Obama-appointed Carla Hayden as Librarian of Congress. Hayden has been replaced by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, who is filling the position on an ‘acting’ basis.”
The justices did not provide a reason for the decision. They did, however, note that the denial of the administration’s request “is not a ruling on the merits of the legal issues presented in the litigation.”
The Supreme Court deferred on ruling on the government’s application in November until after it had heard arguments and rendered decisions in Trump v. Slaughter and Trump v. Cook. The court issued rulings in those cases on Monday.
In Slaughter, the majority (6-3) ruled that presidents have the constitutional authority to remove members of so-called “independent agencies” like the Federal Trade Commission. In doing so, they affirmed that “Subordinates who exercise the President’s power are subject to removal by him.”
In Cook, the majority (5-4) denied the administration’s request to pause a lower court injunction that prevented Trump from firing Lisa Cook, a Democrat member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. The court argued that Trump cannot remove Cook “at any time, for any reason, without any notice before, and without any judicial check after.”
The decision did not address “the ultimate question” of whether Trump can remove Cook “for cause,” with Chief Justice John Roberts arguing that it “will depend in part on the underlying facts.”
“Rather,” he wrote, “we have simply addressed the parties’ arguments about the appropriate legal standards under which the facts must be evaluated.”
The Supreme Court’s order in Blanche v. Perlmutter will permit Perlmutter to remain in her position while litigation over her removal continues in the lower courts.
