A Sharp Divide on Independence vs. Executive Control
Judge Gregory Katsas authored the majority opinion, joined by Judge Justin Walker, both characterizing the roles of Wilcox and Harris as sufficiently executive to fall under the president’s constitutional removal authority.
But in a forceful dissent, Judge Florence Pan warned that the majority’s narrow interpretation of Humphrey’s Executor could unravel the structure of administrative independence itself.
Dissent: A Path Toward Eliminating Independent Agencies
“Under my colleagues’ reasoning,” Pan argued, “it appears that no independent agencies may lawfully exist in this country.” She cautioned that the majority’s logic, if extended, could open the door for presidents to dismiss leaders of dozens of agencies Congress has traditionally shielded from political turbulence.
A Panel Split With High Stakes for the Administrative State
Judges Katsas, Walker, and Pan formed the three-judge panel, whose ruling adds yet another chapter to the growing body of litigation reshaping the boundaries between the executive branch and the administrative state.
With the Supreme Court already engaged—via its stay order—the issue appears headed back toward the nation’s highest court, where the decades-old balance of power between Congress and the presidency may again be up for revision.
