WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump both a win and a loss Monday in allowing his firing of Federal Trade Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter, but ruling that he cannot remove Lisa Cook from the Federal Reserve’s board of governors.

The 6-3 decision in Trump’s favor in the Federal Trade Commission case essentially expands the president’s authority over agency governing panels, further calling into question which bodies are independent of the executive branch.

The court, split along its familiar ideological divide, held that requiring for-cause removal for political appointees on the FTC’s five-member panel is “contrary to the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution.”

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion.

“The FTC has the power to promulgate substantive rules carrying the force of law, investigate businesses and enforce statutes through in-house adjudications, and file civil suits on behalf of the United States in federal court,” Roberts wrote. “The FTC unquestionably exercises executive power and must therefore be controlled by the Chief Executive.”

The decision nullifies the court’s 1935 unanimous decision, Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, which overruled President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s removal of William Humphrey from the commission. The framework of the nearly century-old ruling “has not withstood the test of time,” Roberts wrote.

“If anything more is left of Humphrey’s, the Court overrules it. Humphrey’s has for decades been a result in search of a rationale …” he continued.

Trump hailed the decision in a post on his Truth Social platform Monday.

“To show the importance of the Slaughter Case, 90 years of precedent has been COMPLETELY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY OVERRULED, greatly increasing Presidential Power at a time when it is most needed!” Trump wrote. 

Dissent presses for independence

Liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented.

Sotomayor wrote that the structure of executive boards that manage nuclear energy, consumer products and workplace safety, among others, “allows the agencies to address complex problems while enjoying some independence from Presidential removal and thus absolute partisan control.”  

Trump fired Slaughter on March 28 in an email that said her “continued service on the FTC is inconsistent with my administration’s priorities.” Slaughter sued and won in federal district court and at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Slaughter has served as an FTC commissioner since 2018, during Trump’s first term. President Joe Biden reappointed her and the Senate unanimously confirmed her for a second term in 2023.

Alvero Bedoya, who served as FTC commissioner under Biden, said the decision reduces the commission to a “little lap dog” for Trump’s allies. 

Bedoya delivered the remarks during a press call organized by the progressive think tank Groundwork Collaborative.  

“The idea that putting the FTC under the direct control of Donald Trump is going to make people’s lives easier is laughable, and it is only going to make things worse,” Bedoya said. “The only people who are going to be helped by this are this president’s billionaire donors who are actively being sued by the Federal Trade Commission.”

Bedoya noted the commission is in litigation with Amazon and Meta, whose leaders, Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg, each donated $1 million for Trump’s inauguration. 

Cook firing disallowed

But the president’s power over firing members of governing boards falls short when it comes to the Federal Reserve, and when the targeted appointee is in the midst of a separate legal battle.

In a 5-4 opinion, also delivered by Roberts, the court denied the Trump administration’s application to stay a lower court ruling allowing Cook to remain a board governor while litigation plays out.

Trump fired Cook in August 2025 via post on social media after Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte, now Trump’s acting head of national intelligence, accused Cook of mortgage fraud.  

“The ultimate question of whether the President can remove Cook for cause will depend in part on the underlying facts,” Roberts wrote. “In this opinion, we have not addressed the facts, as they have yet to be found or analyzed under the relevant legal standards.”

Trump, critics note ‘procedural’ basis

Trump said the justices sent the case back to the lower court on a “strictly procedural basis.”

“We will take appropriate action immediately to make sure that someone who has committed wrongdoing will not be making vital decisions concerning the Welfare of the United States of America!” he wrote on Truth Social. 

Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett dissented. 

Thomas argued the court’s decision violates a president’s constitutional powers to remove executive officers at will.

“Cook’s office was not her ‘property’ because, in this country, government officials do not own the public offices in which they serve,” Thomas wrote. “Apparent mortgage fraud was a ‘cause’ to remove Cook. And, the statute authorizing the President to remove Cook for ‘cause’ says nothing about notice or a hearing, so it does not require notice and a hearing.”

Graham Steele, former assistant secretary of financial institutions at the Treasury Department, said during the Groundwork Collaborative call that the decision is “cold comfort.”

“It was a 5-4 decision,” Steele said. The “majority rests on a narrow set of procedural grounds, and it should have been obvious to members of the court how illegal the president’s actions were in trying to remove Governor Cook. And yet this was, to use a technical legal term, ‘a squeaker’ of a case when it came down to the opinions themselves.”

Trump and the Fed

The Cook ruling is a setback in Trump’s ongoing interest in exerting influence over the central bank. 

The Senate approved Trump’s new pick for Fed chair, Kevin Warsh, last month.

Justices heard oral arguments in January over whether Trump overreached his authority in firing Cook. The arguments drew a high-profile appearance of then-Fed Chair Jerome Powell to the court.

Even conservative justices showed skepticism that Trump’s social media firing Cook was within his powers under the Federal Reserve Act, which stipulates presidents can only remove board governors “for cause.”

Trump claimed his firing of Cook, which accused her of “deceitful and potentially criminal conduct in a financial matter,” was not reviewable in court.

Cook, a Biden appointee, denied any wrongdoing and challenged the termination, arguing that an “unsubstantiated allegation about private mortgage applications,” submitted prior to her Senate confirmation, does not amount to cause for removal. 

Cook also argued that Trump denied her due process in not giving her notice or a chance to respond to the allegations.

Amazon delivery drivers across the United States have, according to prior reporting and driver accounts, described pressure to meet demanding quotas and the presence of in-van AI cameras that monitor driving, but the challenges don’t stop there. According to a new report, the new electric delivery vans cut the air conditioning when the rear sliding door is left open while drivers step out to deliver a package, potentially posing risks for those working in hot climates.

Several drivers have revealed that the latest Amazon delivery vans, built by Rivian, have been updated to turn off the A/C if the sliding rear door is left open for more than 30 seconds. That’s a nuisance given that workers are always stopping, getting out, and delivering packages, often hundreds of times during a shift, and may open the door repeatedly on a single block.

Read: Rivian Van Owners Are Learning A Small Habit Can Lead To A Big Problem

After finding multiple reports of drivers complaining about the issue, 404Media reached out to Amazon seeking clarification about the recent software update. According to the retail giant, the A/C is only turned off if the sliding rear door is left open for 30 seconds.

Amazon Has Its Say

“Rivian recently released a software update for Electric Delivery Vehicles that actually extends climate control for drivers,” Amazon said. “As a result, the AC now runs for up to 10 minutes after a driver exits the vehicle, ensuring a cool cabin when they return. The timer resets at every stop. The AC only shuts off if the driver’s sliding door is left open for more than 30 seconds — a battery conservation measure.” 

In all likelihood, Amazon doesn’t want drivers wasting power by blasting the A/C while the sliding door is open, letting hot air into the cabin. Nevertheless, it would be frustrating for drivers, particularly if they park in one spot and have to deliver multiple packages to one block at the same time, perhaps forcing them to open and close the sliding door repeatedly, or risk the air conditioning switching off.

Will Amazon do anything to address the complaints? It remains to be seen, although Amazon does note its newer Rivian delivery vans also include ventilated seats to help drivers during the summer.

Update: After publication, Amazon contacted Carscoops to note that its delivery drivers are employed by Delivery Service Partners, which set their own routes, and to clarify that its in-van safety cameras record no audio, are reviewed only by trained personnel after a specific safety event rather than monitored in real time, and can be switched off during breaks.

The popularity of powerful all-electric motorcycles has surged in recent years, partly because of their affordability and the fact that they are often classified as e-bikes, meaning they do not require registration or a driver’s license. Amazon is now moving to make some of them harder to buy in California.

The retail giant announced it will stop selling certain electric bikes capable of exceeding California’s legal speed limits. The state currently caps pedal-assisted e-bikes at 28 mph (45 km/h) and throttle-assisted e-bikes, the type more commonly used by casual riders, at 20 mph (32 km/h).

Read: Parents Might Pay The Price For Their Kid’s E-Bike Recklessness

Many manufacturers of more powerful electric two-wheelers, often with designs inspired by traditional dirt bikes, have been able to skirt local legislation by labeling them as e-bikes, even though some can exceed 60 mph (96 km/h). However, state laws do require e-bikes that exceed speed limits to be registered and to comply with certain age restrictions.

“The things people are selling as e-bikes are clearly motorcycles, mopeds, off-road dirt bikes, out-of-class devices that might have pedals, and they can sell them as ‘e-bikes’ because they are electric and they are bikes, but they’re totally illegal for electric bicycles,” Bill Sellin from the Orange County Bicycle Coalition told ABC 7.

Crashes Are On The Rise

Amazon’s crackdown comes shortly after California Attorney General Rob Bonta emphasized existing laws around e-bikes. Over the past four years, crashes and injuries linked to e-bikes and electric motorcycles have risen 430 percent in Southern California.

More recently, Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer’s office filed manslaughter charges against the mother of a 14-year-old boy accused of hitting and killing an 81-year-old man while riding an electric motorcycle. Authorities say the mother had been warned multiple times that her son was not legally allowed to ride it.

WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW: California’s demand for zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) is surging despite federal attempts to derail the Golden State’s pursuit of a 100% clean energy future. A record 29.1% of all new cars purchased in Q3 of 2025 were ZEVs. SACRAMENTO — Today, Governor Gavin Newsom announced that Californians purchased 124,755 zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) in the third …

The post California Smashes ZEV Sales Record in Q3   appeared first on Alternative Energy HQ.

Stop-work orders for wind undercut investor confidence in financing all energy projects, including nuclear September 3, 2025 – The administration’s energy dominance agenda will fail, done in by collapsing investor confidence, unless the White House stops issuing stop-work orders for offshore wind. Undercutting these projects, each of which has billions of private investment dollars committed …

The post Anti-renewable policies are going to cost consumers appeared first on Alternative Energy HQ.