Blue Brief 2025-2026

David McGowan

Lyle L. Jones Professor of Competition and Innovation Law

The Court’s Hamiltonian Moment: Trump v. Cook and Trump v. Slaughter

V.

I n Trump v. Cook , the Court held that the independence of Federal Reserve (Fed) governors is constitutional. The same day, in Trump v. Slaughter , the Court endorsed the “unitary executive” theory and held that the President can fire the members of “independent” agencies that wield executive power. The cases may appear contradictory, but they are not. Cook validates the American tradition of a central bank accountable to markets and therefore insulated from transient political pressure. Slaughter upholds the more general principle that accountability for the use of executive power must align with responsibility for exercising it. Cook relies heavily on the history of central banking in the United States. The Constitution established the structure but not the substance of a government. It stitched together colonies long on debt and short on cash but solved neither problem. Hamilton’s monetary policies gave the new government life and energy

through a financial system that converted state war debts into paper currency for liquidity and employed a de facto central bank to manage the money supply. The Court quoted his assessment of what was needed to make his proposed Bank of the United States effective: “it appears to be an essential ingredient in its structure, that it shall be under a private not a public Direction,” one that could resist “the temptations of momentary exigencies.” Lisa Cook is a Fed Governor; her statutory fourteen-year term expires in 2038. In August 2025, a federal housing official asserted on social media that in 2021, before her appointment, Cook fraudulently claimed two different homes as her primary residence on mortgage applications. Within half an hour President Trump was on social media demanding Cook’s resignation; three days later he sent her a letter purporting to fire her on the ground that he had lost confidence in her integrity. (Ironists take note.)

UNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO SCHOOL OF LAW | Faculty Review of 2025-2026 U.S. Supreme Court Term | Page 17