Judge backs Fed independence as Lisa Cook removal fight returns after Supreme Court block

Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook’s attorney on Wednesday responded to President Donald Trump’s renewed threat to remove Cook from the Federal Reserve Board, arguing that the president is attempting to sidestep restrictions set by the U.S. Supreme Court. The renewed dispute follows a late-June ruling from the Supreme Court that blocked Trump from carrying out a plan to fire Cook, according to CNBC. The court’s decision did not end the broader effort, CNBC reported, because it left open a narrower route for the administration to attempt another removal using a different approach. Cook’s lawyer fired back at Trump’s latest comments, saying the renewed effort is not a fresh lawful test but an attempt to re-create the same outcome the Supreme Court already stopped. The attorney characterized Trump’s threat as an overreach that would undermine the structure Congress created to protect the independence of the Federal Reserve, according to CNBC. In the Supreme Court action, the central issue was whether Trump could remove a Fed governor on terms that the Constitution and statutes do not allow. The Supreme Court’s late-June block meant Cook could not be removed under the administration’s initial theory, and it constrained the president from immediately taking the step he sought. Still, the Supreme Court’s decision, as described by CNBC, left the president with a possible path to try again. That means Trump can pursue additional legal and procedural moves, but Cook’s side is pressing that those moves cannot simply be a repeat of what the court already rejected. The confrontation is playing out at a time when Federal Reserve Board vacancies and governance questions can have ripple effects across monetary policymaking and market expectations. Even where a governor is not leading the day-to-day operational decisions of the central bank, the composition of the Board and the continuity of voting members are closely watched by businesses and households. Cook remains in her role unless and until a new removal action succeeds in court. If the administration pursues the alternate path left open by the Supreme Court, Cook’s attorney is expected to challenge the effort again, with the likelihood that any renewed removal will be tested under the same constitutional and statutory guardrails that limited the first attempt. For now, the immediate practical effect of the Supreme Court’s late-June order is continued board membership for Cook. The renewed threat has shifted the dispute from the initial block to a follow-on legal battle over how far the administration can go without violating the Supreme Court’s ruling, CNBC reported.