In a major legal development, a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. has allowed President Trump to remove key officials from independent federal agencies, overturning earlier rulings that had blocked those firings.
The case involves Gwynne Wilcox of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and Cathy Harris of the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB)—both appointed by former President Joe Biden. Their dismissals had been challenged in court, with two lower court judges ruling that their removals were illegal.
But now, a three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has issued a 2-1 decision that pauses those lower court rulings and allows the removals to go forward for now.
Who Are the Officials Involved?
Gwynne Wilcox
Appointed by Biden and confirmed by the Senate in 2023, Wilcox was named Chair of the NLRB in December 2024.
Cathy Harris
Harris was confirmed in 2022 to the Merit Systems Protection Board, becoming chair in 2023.
Both women were dismissed by the Trump administration in early 2025 shortly after Trump’s return to the White House for his second term.
Why Were They Fired?
The Trump administration claimed that the NLRB and MSPB were not operating in line with the administration’s goals. Wilcox received a formal letter, and Harris was notified by email that they were being terminated immediately.
Legal Arguments: Power vs. Protection
Wilcox and Harris sued, saying their firings violated federal laws. These laws state that officials on these boards can only be removed for “neglect of duty” or “malfeasance in office”—not just for political reasons.
But the Trump administration argued that those legal limits are unconstitutional because they interfere with the president’s power under Article II of the U.S. Constitution.
Appeals Court Decision: President Can Proceed
Two judges on the appeals court sided with Trump:
“The people elected the president to enforce the nation’s laws,” wrote Judge Justin Walker, a Trump appointee.
He emphasized that the president—not appointed board members—has the authority to execute national policy.
Strong Dissent from Judge Millet
Judge Patricia Millet, appointed by President Obama, strongly disagreed.
“The court’s decision today creates instability and turmoil,” she wrote.
She also warned that this decision could affect many other federal agencies, such as:
- The Federal Reserve
- The National Transportation Safety Board
- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
According to her, the ruling could create legal chaos, leaving “millions of employees and employers in limbo.”
What’s Next?
This ruling is temporary and only blocks the lower court’s decision while the appeal continues. The case is still being considered and could eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court.
This case is more than just about two officials—it’s about how much power the U.S. president has to remove people from independent agencies. While Trump’s legal team sees it as a presidential right, critics fear it could undermine the independence of watchdog boards.
As the court case moves forward, the decision could shape how the U.S. government balances political control with agency independence—a question that could have long-lasting effects on American governance.