Skip to main content

Federal Reserve removal power

Trump v. Lisa D. Cook

Also called “the Fed removal case” or “the Lisa Cook case”

Updated Sep 13, 2026

In brief

The Court denied interim relief, leaving the injunction protecting Cook's position in place for now without resolving the ultimate removal dispute.

Where it stands
Decided

Decided 5-4 · June 29, 2026 · Opinion by Justice Kavanaugh

What it’s about
The Court denied the Government’s request to pause an injunction that prevents President Trump from removing Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook while her case continues.
Who it affects
Cook remains in office for now. The Court did not finally decide whether the President may lawfully remove her for cause based on the alleged pre-appointment conduct.

Summary: written with AI from the case record.

Illustration for Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, Applicant v. Lisa D. Cook, Member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Conceptual illustration · AI-generated

What it's about

The ruling leaves Cook in office for now and does not finally decide whether the President may lawfully remove her for cause.

The case concerns the legal protections for Federal Reserve governors and the limits of presidential removal power.

Question presented

Should the Court stay a district court injunction preventing the President from removing a member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors "for cause" based on pre-appointment conduct without prior notice or a hearing?

What the Court decided

Holding

The Government’s application is denied.

The vote

  • Joined the judgment
  • Dissented
  • Wrote an opinion
Majority · 5joined the Court's opinion
  1. Kagan
  2. Kavanaughwrote the opinion
  3. Jacksonalso wrote separately
  4. Sotomayor
  5. Robertsalso wrote separately
Dissenting · 4disagreed with the result
  1. Barrettwrote a dissent
  2. Thomaswrote a dissent
  3. Gorsuch
  4. Alitowrote a dissent
5 justices joined the judgment, 4 dissented.

From the opinions

“The President of the United States seeks relief from a court order that restores a principal executive officer to her position after the President removed her.”

— Justice Thomas(dissent)

What's next

The case returns to continued litigation over the facts and legal standards for removing Cook. Lower courts may assess the asserted grounds for removal while the injunction remains in place.

Documents

5

Docket activity

26
  • New analysis added

    Sep 13, 2026 · Court records

  • AI analysis generated: Case Briefing

    Sep 13, 2026 · Generated

  • New analysis added

    Sep 12, 2026 · Court records

  • AI analysis generated: Decision Record

    Sep 12, 2026 · Generated

  • AI analysis generated: Impact Analysis

    Sep 12, 2026 · Generated

Show 7 more
  • AI analysis generated: Opinion Summary

    Sep 12, 2026 · Generated

  • New analysis added

    Sep 5, 2026 · Court records

  • New analysis added

    Sep 5, 2026 · Court records

  • New analysis added

    Sep 3, 2026 · Court records

  • New analysis added

    Sep 3, 2026 · Court records

  • Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata

    Sep 3, 2026 · Court records

  • New analysis added

    Sep 3, 2026 · Court records

Older entries are on the full docket.

More questions

4
What did the Supreme Court do in Trump v. Cook?
The Court denied the Government's application to pause the district court injunction. That injunction remains in effect during the litigation.
Who remains on the Federal Reserve Board?
Lisa Cook remains in her position for now because the injunction preventing her removal was not paused.
Did the Court decide whether President Trump can remove Cook?
No. The Court's action was interim and did not finally decide whether the President may lawfully remove Cook for cause.
What happens next in the Cook case?
The parties continue litigating in lower court. The unresolved issues include the facts and legal standards governing the attempted removal.

Sources

Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.

Checked Sep 13, 2026Methodology

Court records and filings

Reporting and analysis