• by Wendy Davis , July 18, 2025

Ruling against President Donald Trump, a federal judge has granted Federal Trade Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter's request for an order reinstating her to the agency.

"The removal of Ms. Slaughter was blatantly unlawful," U.S. District Court Judge Loren AliKhan in Washington, D.C. wrote in a ruling issued late Thursday.

The Justice Department is appealing that ruling to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals and has asked AliKhan to stay the reinstatement order while the appeal proceeds.

AliKhan has not yet ruled on that petition.vAliKhan has not yet ruled on that petition.

Slaughter was one of two FTC officials ousted by Trump earlier this year -- a move that left the five-member agency without any Democratic commissioners. The other ousted official, Democrat Alvaro Bedoya, officially resigned from the FTC last month.

Slaughter sued for reinstatement, arguing that Congress established the agency as an independent five-member commission, with each member appointed for a term of seven years and removable only for one of three reasons -- inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.

She argued in a motion for summary judgment that her ouster violated the Supreme Court's 1935 decision in a case called Humphrey's Executor, which also involved a president's attempt to remove an FTC commissioner. The Supreme Court said in that matter that Franklin D. Roosevelt lacked authority to fire an FTC member without cause.

AliKhan agreed with Slaughter, ruling that the Supreme Court's opinion in Humphrey's Executor was still good law.

Trump's attempt to expel Slaughter from the FTC "did not comply with the FTC Act’s removal protections," AliKhan wrote.

"Because those protections remain constitutional, as they have for almost a century, Ms. Slaughter’s purported removal was unlawful and without legal effect," she added.

The Justice Department had urged AliKhan to reject Slaughter's claims for several reasons. Among others, the government argued that the FTC today wields greater power than it did 90 years ago.

AliKhan rejected that argument, essentially writing that only the Supreme Court -- and not a district court judge like her -- could overrule its 1935 decision in Humphrey's Executor.

"It is not the role of this court to decide the correctness, prudence, or wisdom of the Supreme Court’s decisions -- even one from ninety years ago," she added. "Whatever the Humphrey’s Executor Court may have thought at the time of that decision, this court will not second-guess it now."

Bedoya also sued over his ouster, but AliKhan ruled Thursday that his claim was moot because he recently resigned from the agency.