US Economic Perspectives "Court decides on Cook and the Fed itself" Pingle

Research evidence excerpt

US Economic Perspectives "Court decides on Cook and the Fed itself" Pingle

Global Research

29 June 2026ab

US Economic Perspectives Economics

AmericasCourt decides on Cook and the Fed itself

Jonathan Pingle

Economist

A narrow decision on Lisa Cook case; a larger decision on the Federal Reserve jonathan.pingle@ubs.com

+1-212-713 2225

The Supreme Court expanded the President's ability to remove officials in one decision

today. However, in another decision today the Court ruled the Federal Reserve is Abigail Watt

Economistdifferent, and Lisa Cook could remain in place and serve as a Governor on the Board of

abigail.watt@ubs.com

Governors of the Federal Reserve while she defends herself against accusations of +1-212-882 6929

mortgage fraud. The Supreme Court did not rule directly on the charges, nor whether

they might be sufficient for removal, but on the latter point offered guidelines for lower Alan Detmeister

courts to consider. Also, in the majority opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts

alan.detmeister@ubs.com

was the upholding of the constitutionality of the Federal Reserve itself, a periodic if +1-212-713 1222

obscure concern in legal debates surrounding the Federal Reserve.

Amanda Wilcox

Separate from the Cook case, but related, the Trump v. Slaughter case decided today amanda.wilcox@ubs.com

reviewed so-called "removability" provisions. As we have written previously, the +1-212-713 3899

Supreme Court has been eroding the Congressional protections limiting the President's Jalen Nichols

ability to remove appointed officials, and members of independent agency boards.. The Economist

main precedent that set a threshold for removability was a 1935 Supreme Court jalen.nichols@ubs.com

decision, Humphrey's Executor v. United States.