← Home
Odd Lots · July 17, 2026 · 1h 5m

Lev Menand and Nathan Tankus on Why Fed Independence Is Now Hanging by a Thread

A Supreme Court decision on Lisa Cook's firing reveals a fundamental crack in Fed independence. While the court protected Cook's position, it simultaneously allowed the President to fire individual FTC members, undermining quasi-independent agencies. Lev Menand and Nathan Tankus explore the legal history from Hamilton onward that explains why the Fed is treated differently—and how long that exception will hold.

This summary was generated from show notes and public descriptions, not from a full transcript review. Details may contain inaccuracies.

Editorial

The Federal Reserve Exception to the Slaughter Rule
The Supreme Court's ruling on Lisa Cook reveals a hidden constitutional exception: the Fed is treated differently than other quasi-independent agencies when it comes to presidential removal powers.
FTC Independence Simultaneously Undermined
While the Cook ruling protected the Fed, a parallel Supreme Court decision allowed the President to fire individual FTC members, weakening the independence of another quasi-independent agency.
Alexander Hamilton's Design Explains Modern Fed Independence
The legal protection for the Fed traces back to Hamilton's original constitutional vision: central banking required insulation from electoral politics.
Presidential Removal Powers Are the New Battleground
The Cook case and FTC case both center on who can remove agency heads—and this is becoming the arena where agency independence is won or lost.
The Fed's protection from presidential removal is an exception carved out by courts and tradition, not a stable constitutional principle grounded in logic.

Misc

Lisa Cook firing case reached Supreme Court after year of legal battle
5-4 decision favored Cook, but same court weakened FTC independence in parallel ruling
The 'Federal Reserve Exception to the Slaughter Rule' is the legal doctrine at stake
Was this useful?