
Supreme Court Oral Arguments [25A312] Trump, President of U.S. v. Cook
Jan 21, 2026
General Sauer, a senior government appellate advocate, discusses the complexities of presidential removal authority concerning Governor Cook's mortgage misrepresentations. Mr. Clement, representing Cook, argues for the independence of the Federal Reserve, highlighting the importance of procedural limits on removal. They delve into whether inadvertent errors constitute 'cause' for removal, the standards of judicial review, and the implications of their arguments on the separation of powers, all while the justices challenge and probe the nuances of the case.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Government Frames 'Cause' As Broad Presidential Prerogative
- The Solicitor General framed removal for "cause" as broad and historically deferential to the President.
- He argued courts should defer once a removal fits conduct, fitness, ability, or competence.
Three Legal Paths To Deference
- General Sauer argued judicial review is limited once removal falls within "cause."
- He cited historical cases and ultra vires constraints to justify deference.
Seek Stay To Preserve Presidential Removal Power
- The Solicitor General urged the Court to grant a stay and respect historical limits on equitable reinstatement.
- He argued Sawyer bars preliminary injunctions that restore a removed principal officer.

