In his first fifty days in office, President Trump has taken numerous actions to consolidate the power of the Executive Branch. Shortly after taking office, he dismissed heads of multiple Executive Branch agencies and asserted that agency leaders must align with his Administration’s objectives. While President Trump’s authority to replace many Executive Branch officials is unquestioned, his authority to remove appointees to independent agencies is less clear.
Within his first weeks in office, President Trump removed NLBR Member Gwynne Wilcox as well as EEOC Commissioners Charlotte Burrows and Jocelyn Samuels. The President did not cite any basis for these removals beyond his executive authority to remove officer who do not share the objectives of his administration. The effect of these removals is significant. In the long-term, removing these officials from their offices provides the President with the opportunity to appoint their replacements. Members of these agencies typically serve staggered five-year terms, limiting any single administration’s influence. Terminating these officials provides President Trump the opportunity to stack membership on these boards with his chosen appointees.
In the short-term, however, these removals leave the NLRB and EEOC with just two officials each, and thus short of the quorums needed to take any action. President Trump has already signaled new visions for his priorities within the NLRB, the EEOC, and throughout his Administration. Turning those visions into established policy can take some time, particularly through the regulatory rulemaking process. By leaving the NLRB and EEOC without quorums, the President has limited these agencies, impacting their ability to enforce priorities and regulations from previous administrations.
Former NLRB Member Wilcox has already brought suit against the administration for her removal, and both former EEOC Commissioners Burros and Samuels have suggested a legal challenge. Courts have generally distinguished between executive branch officials (who are generally removable at will by the President) and officials with quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial authority. Where officials have such quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial authority, the Supreme Court has previously held that the President’s ability to terminate these officials is not absolute. The Administration has defended its actions by arguing that, despite how their structure, the NLRB and EEOC exercise “executive power” and thus fall under the authority of the President.
This week, Judge Beryl Howell of the US District Court for the District of Columbia rejected the Administration’s position, finding in favor of Wilcox and ordering her reinstated as a Member of the NLRB. The Administration has appealed, and will seek a stay of the order pending their appeal. Such stays are typically granted, meaning the NLRB will likely remain without a quorum until the appeal is resolved. The President’s actions removing officials from other federal agencies as similarly been challenged, meaning the determination as to the Executive’s authority will likely need to be decided by the Supreme Court.
In the meantime, employers face continued uncertainty out of DC. Pronouncements are coming out of the Administration at a rapid pace, yet so too are legal challenges. Employers are left navigating unclear guidance, unsure how the lack of a quorum might affect pending cases or regulatory enforcement. The members of the KMK Labor and Employment Team are here to help you navigate through any question you may have and put your Company on the path to success.
KMK Law articles and blog posts are intended to bring attention to developments in the law and are not intended as legal advice for any particular client or any particular situation. The laws/regulations and interpretations thereof are evolving and subject to change. Although we will attempt to update articles/blog posts for material changes, the article/post may not reflect changes in laws/regulations or guidance issued after the date the article/post was published. Please consult with counsel of your choice regarding any specific questions you may have.
ADVERTISING MATERIAL.
© 2025 Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL. All Rights Reserved
- Partner
Greg Robinson assists his clients in navigating the complex world of workplace laws and regulations. He has counseled clients on a wide array of employment matters, including wage and hour disputes, discrimination charges ...
Topics/Tags
Select- Employment Law
- Labor & Employment Law
- Discrimination
- EEOC
- Tax Credit
- Title VII
- Overtime Pay
- Social Media
- Religion Discrimination
- Employer Policies
- Labor Law
- Employment Litigation
- Employee Tips
- One Big Beautiful Bill
- Coronavirus
- Employer Rules
- Wage & Hour
- Department of Labor
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- NLRB
- Pregnancy Discrimination
- Artificial Intelligence
- Workplace Violence
- Non-Compete Agreements
- OSHA
- Reasonable Accommodation
- Compliance
- FLSA
- National Labor Relations Board
- Department of Justice
- Worker Classification
- Privacy
- Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation
- Supreme Court
- NLRA
- Harassment
- Arbitration
- Diversity
- FMLA
- Federal Trade Commission
- Workplace Accommodations
- Performance Improvement Plans
- Department of Homeland Security
- Immigration and Customs Enforcement
- Foreign Nationals
- Immigration and Nationality Act
- Litigation
- IRS
- Inclusion
- LGBTQ+
- Medical Marijuana
- Disability Discrimination
- Retirement
- National Labor Relations Act
- Accommodation
- Sexual Orientation Discrimination
- Employer Handbook
- Race Discrimination
- ERISA
- ADAAA
- Unions
- ACA
- Affordable Car Act
- Medical Cannabis Dispensaries
- Technology
- Sexual Harassment
- Whistleblower
- Federal Arbitration Act
- United States Supreme Court
- Transgender Issues
- Disability
- 401(k)
- Sixth Circuit
- Employment Settlement Agreements
- Fair Labor Standards Act
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
- Benefits
- Class Action Litigation
- Disability Law
- Gender Identity Discrimination
- Posting Requirements
- Paycheck Protection Program
- E-Discovery
- Evidence
- Securities Law
- Environmental Law
- Family and Medical Leave Act
- Preventive Care Benefits
- Privacy Laws
- Health Savings Account
- SECURE Act
- US Department of Labor Employee Benefits Security Administration
- Healthcare Reform
- Representative Election Regulations
- Older Workers' Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA)
- Telecommuting
- Affirmative Action
- Compensable Time
- Electronically Stored Information
- Equal Opportunity Clause
- Security Screening
- E-Discovery Case Law
- Electronic Data Discovery
- ESI
- Occupational Safety and Health Administration
- Unemployment Insurance Integrity Act
- American Medical Association
- Attendance Policy
- Classification
- Fair Minimum Wage
- Federal Minimum Wage
- Misclassification
- Return to Work
- Seniority Rights
- State Minimum Wage
- Wage Increase
- Confidentiality
- Disability Leave
- Equal Pay
- Genetic Information Discrimination
- Media Policy
- National Origin Discrimination
- Retaliation
- Social Media Content
- Taxation
- Antitrust
- Employment Incentives
- HIRE Act
- Social Security Tax
Recent Posts
- Work Opportunity Tax Credit At Risk: Use It Before You Lose It
- IRS Releases Additional Guidance on New Tip and Overtime Tax Deductions for 2025
- EEOC Takes Aim at Perceived Anti-American Bias
- Ohio “Mini-WARN” Act Now In Effect: Key Compliance Takeaways for Employers
- EEOC's Renewed Focus on Religious Discrimination: What Employers Need to Know
- No Free Delivery: Misclassification Comes at a Price
- One Tweet Away From Trouble: Social Media at Work
- Outsourcing Hiring Won’t Outsource Risk: Implications for Employers Using AI in Hiring
- No Intent, No Liability: Sixth Circuit Narrows Employer Liability for Third-Party Harassment
- AI in Hiring: The Promise, the Pitfalls, and the Response
