Understanding the Battle Over Federal Agency Leadership and the Meaning of True Justice
The Political Tug-of-War Over Federal Agencies
Let’s break down what’s going on in plain English. There’s a big fight happening in American politics about who gets to run important federal agencies — like the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and even the Federal Reserve. These agencies have a lot of power to shape the country, and their leaders can stick around for years. Traditionally, Congress has tried to make sure these leaders can’t just be fired whenever a new president wants, especially if those leaders were appointed by a president from the other political party.
Recently, President Trump started firing several Democrat-appointed heads and board members in these agencies. This led to a bunch of lawsuits. People are arguing whether the president really has the right to remove these leaders, or if Congress can protect them from being kicked out without a good reason.
What Does the Supreme Court Say?
Some of these fights have gone all the way up to the Supreme Court. Several times, the Court has said the president can fire officials who have big influence over the executive branch — even if Congress tried to make it harder. In other words, the president has the power to “clean house” and put their own team in charge.
But here’s the twist: there’s a special case with the FTC. Way back in 1935, the Supreme Court made a unanimous decision (called Humphrey’s Executor) that protected FTC commissioners from being fired at will by the president. The idea was to keep the FTC independent, so it wouldn’t be pushed around by political winds.
And here’s the kicker: that old decision is still the law. Lower court judges are bound by it, even if some Supreme Court justices today think it’s outdated and might want to change it eventually.
This makes me question whether the Supreme Court acted in good faith by recently allowing Trump to fire the F.T.C. Commissioner, especially as the justices now consider overturning a precedent that restrains presidential power—raising concerns that political loyalty may be taking precedence over principled decision-making.
The Struggle for True Justice
So, why does any of this matter to regular folks? Well, it’s all about keeping the system fair. If presidents can fire agency heads whenever they like, those agencies might end up doing whatever the president wants — even if it’s not best for the people. On the other hand, too much protection for agency heads could let them ignore what voters want. It’s a delicate balance between independence and accountability.
Legal scholars and judges are wrestling with these questions, trying to figure out what the Constitution really means. Some believe the president should have almost total control, while others think agencies need insulation from politics. It’s not just a technical legal fight; it’s about how our government should work and how justice is delivered.
Justice in the Real World: Lessons from Habakkuk 1:4
That leads us to the bigger picture — what happens when justice gets twisted or perverted, like the ancient prophet Habakkuk warned in the Bible. Habakkuk looked around and saw that the law was “paralyzed,” that “justice never prevails,” and that “the wicked surround the righteous.” In other words, he saw a society where the system designed to protect people was failing them, and those in power were using the law to hurt rather than help.
When courts or government officials forget why their jobs matter — to defend the weak, to keep things fair, and to make sure everyone is heard — justice suffers. Whether it’s corrupt officials, unfair laws, or leaders who only care about their own interests, the result is always the same: regular people lose faith in the system.
What Can We Do?
It’s possible that a reckoning lies ahead if we continue down this uncertain path. Proverbs 14:34 teaches, “Righteousness exalts a nation.” This wisdom reminds us that when a country pursues justice, integrity, and ethical behavior, it earns respect and flourishes. On the other hand, when wrongdoing prevails, it brings shame, and those in leadership carry the weighty responsibility of upholding moral standards.
Still, there is hope. Habakkuk didn’t simply voice his complaints—he cried out for real change. We can follow his example. By staying alert, asking hard questions, and demanding accountability from our leaders, everyone has a role to play in defending justice. The responsibility doesn’t fall only on Congress or the courts; it belongs to all of us.
Ultimately, the struggle in Washington over who gets dismissed or shielded isn’t just political theater. It’s a test of whether our system honors its commitment to fairness and ensures that justice is reliable, not just an ideal.
Justice may sometimes be postponed, ridiculed, or distorted, but the pursuit of what’s right continues. Like Habakkuk, we can voice our sorrow when things are unjust—and we can persist in hoping, working, and praying for the day when the law truly protects everyone.
Minister A Francine Green
September 2025
afrancinegreen.com 