Former President Donald Trump’s recent executive order, titled “Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies,” aims to make independent multi-member agencies more accountable to the executive branch. The order is regarded as constitutionally permissible by legal scholar John Shu, given the absence of statutory prohibitions and the Constitution’s delineation of executive power. The order mandates these agencies to seek the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs’ approval before issuing significant regulatory actions, aligning them more closely with presidential oversight.
The order specifically targets the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Federal Communications Commission, and Securities and Exchange Commission, claiming that these bodies wield too much power without presidential oversight. While monetary policy functions of the Federal Reserve are exempt, other functions like bank supervision fall under this directive. This measure aligns with the unitary executive theory supported by the Supreme Court’s ruling in Seila Law LLC v. CFPB.
The executive order further involves the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) establishing performance benchmarks for agency chairmen and potentially adjusting fiscal allocations. OMB’s control extends to reviewing agency budgets and output, potentially leading to legal challenges if congressional appropriations are not aligned with the order.
This action comes amid a contentious debate over the power and independence of federal agencies, tracing back to the Supreme Court’s decision in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, which restricted the president’s ability to dismiss commissioners of independent agencies without cause. Two recent lawsuits by fired officers, citing Humphrey’s Executor, are expected to culminate at the Supreme Court, potentially reshaping the legal landscape regarding the executive’s role in agency oversight. For further details on this developing story, visit Bloomberg Law.
With the issuance of this order, significant judicial scrutiny is anticipated, possibly setting the stage for a reevaluation of the legitimacy of independent agencies and the extent of presidential authority over them. These proceedings are expected to provoke considerable debate and litigation, with the possibility of resonant ramifications on the separation of powers within the U.S. government.