U.S. Supreme Court has put the brakes on former President Donald Trump’s effort to shake up the federal government, refusing to immediately back his attempt to fire a key Biden-era official. This latest legal showdown is a major setback for Trump’s sweeping plans to restructure Washington, and it could be just the beginning of a much bigger fight.
The high court decided Friday to hold off on ruling whether Trump has the authority to dismiss Hampton Dellinger, the head of the Office of Special Counsel—a key agency responsible for protecting whistleblowers and prosecuting government misconduct. The decision allows Dellinger, a Biden appointee, to remain in his position for now, at least until the lower court’s ruling expires on Wednesday, according to The Hill.
The emergency appeal came after a lower court reinstated Dellinger, blocking Trump’s attempt to remove him. Two conservative justices, Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito, were in favor of allowing Trump’s request, arguing that a federal judge had essentially forced the administration to recognize an official the president had lawfully fired. However, liberal justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson pushed back, saying they would have outright denied Trump’s appeal.
Trump’s administration has wasted no time in taking action against federal employees, aggressively moving to fire officials and restructure agencies. His team has repeatedly expressed frustration over court rulings preventing them from making swift changes, particularly in cases where federal judges have blocked firings, frozen federal funds, and even halted efforts to dismantle certain government agencies like USAID.
With legal battles piling up, this case is just one of many likely to test the limits of presidential power in the coming months. Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris argued that blocking Trump’s authority to fire officials undermines the separation of powers, calling on the Supreme Court to step in immediately. In a court filing, Harris warned that allowing lower courts to interfere in executive decisions sets a dangerous precedent, effectively allowing judges to override presidential authority.
But attorney Joshua Matz, representing Dellinger, dismissed the Trump administration’s argument, saying the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction at this stage. He warned that fast-tracking such disputes could turn the high court into a “rocket docket” for politically charged legal battles, rather than allowing cases to play out through normal judicial processes.
Meanwhile, the administration remains defiant, vowing to continue its push to remove federal officials and implement its agenda despite mounting legal roadblocks. With tensions running high, all eyes are now on the Supreme Court as it decides whether to wade further into this heated political battle—or leave Trump to fight it out in the lower courts.
