Supreme Court Overturns Stay of Removals, Emphasizes Executive Power
It has been a long and winding road regarding whether MSPB Chair Cathy Harris will remain in that job. It is getting much closer to the end now with the Supreme Court weighing in on the issue.
The Supremes overturned a stay, issued by the District Court in the District of Columbia concluding the stay was inappropriate. The Court made this statement in its decision of May 22, 2025:
The stay also reflects our judgment that the Government faces greater risk of harm from an order allowing a removed officer to continue exercising the executive power than a wrongfully removed officer faces from being unable to perform her statutory duty.
The Supreme Court overturned the stay issued by the DC District Court regarding the firing of the MSPB Chair and the Chairman of the National Labor Relations Board. The case has been sent back down the legal chain of command. An appeal of the case can be filed with the Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia.
The Supreme Court has allowed the President’s removal of the MSPB and NLRB 0fficials to stand, subject to appeal before the Court of Appeals, citing the president’s executive authority under Article II of the Constitution which is only subject to narrow exceptions.
The lawyers for the impacted appellants will presumably review the decision, the rationale used by the Supreme Court, and a decision will be made whether the case will proceed to the Court of Appeals.
Filing an appeal is not inexpensive. The decision will presumably analyze whether statements made by the Supreme Court leave a reasonable chance of prevailing in an appeal. The decision will weigh more heavily on the appellants as there is little doubt the Department of Justice would not hesitate to file an appeal if a decision by the Court of Appeals restricts the authority of the president to make these removal decisions.
The analysis will presumably include the probable expense involved, the likelihood of prevailing, and the value of a favorable decision in any event. Those may not be easy decisions to make depending on the source of the money to pay the legal expenses.
The Supreme Court majority did deal a blow to a main argument made in the case that was just decided and the decision contained this statement:
Because the Constitution vests the executive power in the President, see Art. II, §1, cl. 1, he may remove without cause executive officers who exercise that power on his behalf, subject to narrow exceptions recognized by our precedents….The stay reflects our judgment that the Government is likely to show that both the NLRB and MSPB exercise considerable executive power.
Here is the statement of the Supreme Court summarizing its decision and how the case may move forward:
(The earlier decisions of the District Court for the District of Columbia are) stayed pending the disposition of the appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari, if such a writ is timely sought. Should certiorari be denied, this stay shall terminate automatically. In the event certiorari is granted, the stay shall terminate upon the sending down of the judgment of this Court.
The case may never get back to the Supreme Court. A case can be filed with the Court of Appeals for DC. If and when such a decision is issued by the Court of Appeals, a request can be made to the Supreme Court to hear the case.
How the Case Arrived at the Supreme Court
Here is how this issued arrive at the Supreme Court.
President Trump demoted MSPB Chair Cathy Harris on his first day in office from her role as chair of the MSPB, effectively reducing her influence on the board’s operations.
On February 10, 2025, the President fired Harris with a one-sentence email without citing a cause for her removal.
Harris then filed a lawsuit on February 11. She argued her dismissal violated federal law and Supreme Court precedent protecting independent agency officials from arbitrary removal. She asserted that her removal disregarded statutory requirements and the constitutional principles of separation of powers.
On February 18, U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras issued a temporary restraining order reinstating Harris as chairwoman while her lawsuit is adjudicated. This order kept her in place until February 23, 2025, when she must file for a preliminary injunction to extend her reinstatement.
On March 4, U.S. District Court Rudolph Contreras of the District of Columbia agreed with Harris and wrote that federal law states that members of the MSPB may be removed from office “only for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.”
Summary
Currently, it is unclear whether there will be further court action and decisions regarding this case. If it proceeds, FedSmith will work to keep readers advised of the latest changes and decisions and the impact of any final decisions.
