California has become one of the most expensive places to live in the United States. Whether it be the cost of housing, exorbitantly high income taxes, or especially the cost of energy, high costs have pushed many people and businesses to leave for more affordable states such as Nevada, Texas, or Florida. Of the many […]
Let me say the quiet part out loud and put it on the record, knowing it costs something inside my own party. I want documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote. So do most Americans. Gallup puts support for that idea at 83%. I don’t just believe election security matters. I believe that near-unanimity […]
The Supreme Court on Monday cleared the way for President Trump to freely fire officials from the Federal Trade Commission and most — though not all — agencies that have long been politically independent.Why it matters: It is a historic unraveling for agencies that have long been shielded from politics. The ruling will vastly expand presidential power and influence.The big picture: The ruling overturns Humphrey's Executor, a nearly century-old precedent that says independent agency commissioners cannot be fired without specific cause.What they're saying: "If anything more is left of Humphrey's, we overrule it," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court.Yes, but: The 6–3 ruling came with a carve-out for the Federal Reserve, in line with earlier signals that Supreme Court sees the central bank in a different light.The ruling was released alongside a separate 5–4 decision blocking Trump from immediately firing Fed governor Lisa Cook.Roberts emphasized the ruling does not necessarily apply to the Federal Reserve, citing the central bank's "distinct historical tradition."Zoom out: The case centers on Trump's firing of two Democratic appointees, Rebecca Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya.Trump said that allowing Slaughter to remain at the regulatory agency would be "inconsistent with my Administration's policies," according to the letter that announced the firing.Zoom in: With no Democrats set to return to the Republican-led agency, regulatory decisions will be made without real pushback or checks within the building. Democrats had a minority at the FTC to start with, but historically, dissents from the minority over major decisions were a transparent way to peek into decision-making among commissioners.FTC chair Andrew Ferguson has aligned the FTC with Trump's tech agenda, and though he hasn't hesitated to question tech companies for bad behavior, he's also delved into ideological issues like transgender care for children and alleged conservative censorship.The other side: During the hearing in December, liberal justices warned about the consequences of handing presidents too much power by allowing them to fire independent government officials.Should commanders-in-chief be able to fire independent commissioners, "what you are left with is a president that might … [have] control over everything, including much of the lawmaking in this country," Justice Elena Kagan said at the time.
The Supreme Court delivered a setback to President Donald Trump, rejecting his attempt to fire Federal Reserve board member Lisa Cook, while in a separate case giving him a freer hand to exert control over other hitherto independent federal agencies.
The Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump a significant win on Monday by allowing him to fire officials at most independent agencies within the executive branch, undoing a nearly century-old precedent. The 6-3 majority ruled that Trump could fire Rebecca Slaughter, a Democrat-appointed member of the Federal Trade Commission, while also ruling that he can […]
The Supreme Court strengthened President Trump’s control over independent agencies in a 6-3 decision along ideological lines, overruling 91 years of precedent that allowed Congress to insulate certain executive branch officials with firing protections. In an expansion of presidential power, the ruling gives Trump the right to sack Federal Trade Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter, a Democratic appointee who [...]
Case focused on White House’s March 2025 firing of Federal Trade Commission member Rebecca SlaughterUS supreme court decisions – live updatesSign up for the Breaking News US emailThe US supreme court ruled that Donald Trump can fire leaders of independent agencies or commissions, ending 90 years of court precedent that curbs executive power.The vote in the case of Trump v Slaughter is 6-3, with dissents from Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Elena Kagan. Continue reading...
Even though it's been nearly 250 years since the Continental Congress declared independence from Britain, the study of the American Revolution is far from over.
A professor of political science weighed in Monday on the latest controversy surrounding President Donald Trump and his family, one that involves allegations of corruption so blatant, the professor said, that a graphic outlining the alleged corruption bore resemblance to “an inbred family tree.”According to an explosive report from The New York Times Sunday, the sons of both Trump and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick are expected to profit handsomely from a secretive deal signed off on by Trump last November. As revealed by the Times, the Trump administration approved “as much as $1.6 billion in federal financing” for a small American mining company in an arrangement to secure Kazakhstan’s tungsten reserves, a deal that both Trump and Lutnick’s sons are expected to financially benefit from.Adam Bonica, a professor of political science at Stanford, noted the unprecedented simplicity of the alleged corruption scandal, writing on social media that the graphic created by the Times to illustrate the key players in the arrangement was unlike any similar graphic he’d seen before.“Usually these political corruption maps have complicated plumbing,” he wrote in a social media post on Bluesky, a comment that was flagged by Zeteo on Monday. “You know it’s bad when it’s just a closed loop that looks like an inbred family tree.”Trump’s sons – Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump – took a 20% stake in an entity “related to the Kazakhstan project,” the Times reported, and Lutnick’s sons – Brandon and Kyle Lutnick – helped raise funds for the deal through their investment company Cantor Fitzgerald, something that “typically [nets] Cantor millions of dollars in fees.”Even Pini Althaus, the owner of the aforementioned mining company, Kaz Resources, admitted to the Times that the optics of the arrangement looked "disturbing."“I can see how the optics might be disturbing to some people,” Althaus told the Times.Usually these political corruption maps have complicated plumbing. You know it’s bad when it’s just a closed loop that looks like an inbred family tree.[image or embed]— Adam Bonica (@adambonica.bsky.social) June 28, 2026 at 11:54 AM