The Supreme Court's conservative majority delivered a sweeping ruling that dismantles decades of protections for federal regulatory agencies. Chief Justice Roberts authored the majority opinion, reversing a 90-year-old precedent that shielded multi-member agency heads from presidential removal except for misconduct. The decision grants presidents sweeping authority to fire agency leaders across roughly one-third of the federal government.

President Trump hailed the ruling as a major victory for executive power, while legal experts warn it represents the most aggressive expansion of unitary executive theory in modern history. Harvard law professor Daniel Tarullo argues the court has essentially eliminated independent agencies, which could intensify policy whiplash between administrations.

Justice Sotomayor dissented, accusing the majority of substituting democratic governance with total executive control. The ruling creates uncertainty about whether presidents can fire lower-level experts in fields ranging from nuclear weapons to weather prediction.

In a contrasting decision, the court blocked Trump's attempt to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, sending the case back to lower courts. Chief Justice Roberts warned judges to scrutinize removal charges for pretext. This split suggests limits may exist even within the broad new framework for executive authority.