What happens if Trump fires Fed Chair Jerome Powell?
US Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell has been in President Donald Trump's crosshairs for failing to heed his calls for lower interest rates.
Mr Donald Trump's relentless pressure on Mr Jerome Powell is once again
roiling markets and raising questions about what would happen next if the president
fired the embattled Federal Reserve chair .
Such a move would be a first in US history and would almost certainly trigger a landmark lawsuit that would grip both Washington and Wall Street and ultimately be decided by the US Supreme Court.
The latest turmoil erupted July 16 amid reports that Mr Trump was expected to move soon against Mr Powell, who's been in the president's crosshairs for failing to heed his calls for lower interest rates.
Mr Trump pushed back on the reports, saying Mr Powell's ouster was 'highly unlikely, unless he has to leave' due to 'fraud'.
That was a reference to cost overruns for renovations at the Fed headquarters, which Mr Trump and his allies have been zeroing in on as a potential reason to fire Mr Powell 'for cause'.
Section 10 of the Federal Reserve Act, the law that governs the central bank, says members of the Fed's Board of Governors, of which the chair is one, can be 'removed for cause'.
Whether cost overruns amount to such wrongdoing would be a novel matter for the courts.
Top stories
Swipe. Select. Stay informed.
Singapore HSA launches anti-vaping checks near 5 institutes of higher learning
Opinion The workplace needs to step up on mental health to match Singapore's efforts at the national level
Business Market versus mission: What will Income Insurance choose?
Singapore Singapore Zoo celebrates reptile baby boom, including hatchings of endangered species
Life First look at the new Singapore Oceanarium at Resorts World Sentosa
Business Singapore key exports surprise with 13% rebound in June amid tariff uncertainty
Opinion AI and education: We need to know where this sudden marriage is heading
Singapore Coffee Meets Bagel's Singpass check: Why I'll swipe right on that
What would likely happen next if Mr Trump fired Powell?
The firing would take effect right away, but Mr Powell could immediately sue, most likely in Washington federal court, and ask for an injunction reinstating him while the litigation moves forward.
Both sides would file briefs outlining their arguments, giving Mr Powell an opportunity to portray his firing as unjustified. The judge could hold a hearing before issuing a decision on the injunction.
The outcome might hinge on whether Mr Powell sways the judge that he – and the Fed – would suffer 'irreparable harm' during the case if the status quo weren't maintained.
The ruling on the injunction would be crucial because it could be months or longer before a judge rules on the merits of the case.
If Mr Powell's request for an injunction were denied, his firing would remain in effect and the Fed vice-chair would serve as chair. That post is currently held by Mr Philip Jefferson.
Mr Jefferson was nominated to the Fed board by then-president Joe Biden in 2022. Mr Powell was nominated as chair in 2017 by Mr Trump, during his first term as president.
If the injunction were granted, Mr Powell could remain in office while the case moves forward. Either side could appeal, meaning a federal appeals court panel would weigh in, potentially followed by the Supreme Court.
A Supreme Court decision on an injunction in all likelihood would resolve the case. Although the losing side could continue litigating the case, the chances of the justices effectively reversing themselves later on would be small.
What would the Supreme Court likely do if the case got there?
The Supreme Court indicated in May that Mr Trump can't simply fire Mr Powell without any grounds.
In letting Mr Trump oust officials at two other agencies without having to give a justification, the court majority said the decision didn't mean the president wielded similar authority at the Fed. The court called the central bank a 'uniquely structured, quasi-private entity'.
Still, the ruling left open the possibility that Mr Powell could be fired for cause. And Mr Trump's Supreme Court track record is likely to put him in a strong position should the case land there.
The court's conservative supermajority has repeatedly declined to second-guess Mr Trump's judgments, conferring broad criminal immunity on the president in 2024 and then granting a barrage of requests to let policies of his that are under legal challenge take effect in 2025.
'They are getting out of Trump's way,' said Boston University law professor Jed Shugerman, who is an expert on presidential power.
Even if lower court judges or the Supreme Court finds Mr Trump unlawfully fired Mr Powell, it's not clear he'd be able to stay in his job, said Associate Professor Jonathan Shaub, an executive power expert at the University of Kentucky J. David Rosenberg College of Law who has served under Democratic presidents in the White House and Justice Department.
He pointed to two indicators. First, in a June 27 ruling in the legal fight over Mr Trump's policy restricting birthright citizenship, the Supreme Court narrowed the authority of federal judges to provide 'equitable relief', which is a court-ordered remedy requiring a party to do or stop doing something, rather than paying money to settle a lawsuit.
Second, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote an opinion earlier in 2025 suggesting it wasn't appropriate for courts to reinstate high-level officials.
What would a legal case hinge on?
It would depend on what reason or reasons Mr Trump gave.
If the president were to take the 'for cause' route,
accusing Mr Powell of mismanaging the Fed headquarters renovation , the case might hinge on the details of that project and who made the decisions that led to the cost overruns.
Laws that describe 'for cause' generally define the term as encompassing three possibilities: inefficiency; neglect of duty; and malfeasance, meaning wrongdoing, in office.
There's no consensus on what the terms, which gained prominence in Congress more than a century ago, mean specifically. A judge would have to decide, based on arguments from both sides, whether Mr Powell's role in the renovation cost overruns amounted to any of the three.
But clear legal precedents would be few and far between. The Supreme Court has never considered whether a president had adequate grounds to dismiss an official for cause.
'We've never tested this kind of statute before, and certainly not in the context of the Fed,' said scholar Adam White, who focuses on the Supreme Court and the administrative state at the American Enterprise Institute.
A report by Columbia Law School lecturers Jane Manners and Lev Menand said that inefficiency in this context has been described as 'wasteful government administration caused by inept officers', while malfeasance in office has been characterised as a 'wrongful act committed in the execution of one's duties that caused injury to others'.
Neglect of duty, they said, indicated a 'failure to perform one's duties in a way that caused injury to others'.
It would be up to the courts to decide how the 'for cause' standard applied to any lawsuit by Mr Powell.
What's the issue with the Fed's renovation project?
The Fed is in the midst of the first large-scale renovation of its two main buildings in Washington since they were built in the 1930s. The central bank has said the project is designed to reduce costs over time by consolidating the bank's operations.
The renovation plans were first approved by the Fed's board in 2017. Since then, the price tag has swollen. According to Fed budget documents for 2025, the overall cost estimate for the project has risen to US$2.5 billion (S$3.2 billion), compared with US$1.9 billion in 2023.
The bank attributes the increase in the estimate mainly to design changes that were a result of consultations with review agencies, differences between estimated and actual costs, and unforeseen circumstances such as finding more asbestos than anticipated.
A number of Mr Trump allies have seized on the renovation in an apparent effort to build a case to justify firing Powell.
Mr Bill Pulte, director of the Federal Housing Finance Administration has alleged, without providing details, that Mr Powell lied about the specifics of the project during a June 25 Senate hearing.
Mr Pulte has asserted this would warrant removing Mr Powell 'for cause' and called on Congress to investigate. A Fed official said that Mr Powell's statements were truthful.
Mr Russell Vought, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, said in a July 10 social media post that the renovation project was 'an ostentatious overhaul'.
Mr Trump has said that Mr Powell should be investigated for fraud related to the renovations.
At Mr Powell's request, the Fed's Inspector General has launched an investigation of the project's cost increases.
How quickly could a new permanent chair take the helm if Powell is removed?
A new, permanent chair would need to be nominated by Mr Trump and confirmed by the Senate, a process that typically takes some weeks if not months.
In the interim, the Federal Reserve Act states that the vice-chair 'shall serve in the absence of the Chairman'.
What would Powell's dismissal mean for interest rates?
Removing the Fed chief wouldn't necessarily solve Mr Trump's main beef with the central bank.
He wants lower interest rates, but a new chair couldn't deliver that alone. Rates are set by the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), which is currently headed by Mr Powell.
The FOMC has the ability to elect its own chair. That position has typically been held by the Fed chair, though it can be held by any one of the other 18 policymakers on the committee.
All 19 members participate in FOMC meetings and 12 vote. That means a new chair would have to win over the other members with a reasonable case for cutting rates.
How would financial markets react to Powell's dismissal?
Investors value the Fed's status as an independent organisation. Without it, the central bank's pledge to keep inflation in check lacks credibility. And expectations for higher inflation can drastically shift the price of financial assets.
Within 30 minutes of a Bloomberg report that Mr Trump would likely fire Mr Powell, the S&P 500 index of US stocks fell 1 per cent, the yield on the 30-year US treasury bond rose 10 basis points, and the Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index declined 1.2 per cent.
Bloomberg Economics' Anna Wong said that if Mr Trump actually moves to dismiss the Fed chair, it would result eventually in slower economic growth, higher unemployment and sticky inflation. BLOOMBERG

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Straits Times
4 minutes ago
- Straits Times
Miscalculated grants: Overpayments amounted to $7m for most people, a shortage of $2m to others, says MOH
Find out what's new on ST website and app. MOH said that the error had resulted in about $7 million in over-payments for about 90 per cent of the affected individuals. SINGAPORE - The issue that caused a processing error in a government means-testing system which led to about 20,000 people getting the wrong subsidies and grants has been identified, said the Ministry of Health (MOH) on July 22. MOH, which manages the Household Means Eligibility System (Homes), said that the error had resulted in about $7 million in over-payments for about 90 per cent of the affected individuals, and about $2 million in shortfalls for the remainder of those affected. On July 21, MOH said that Homes had experienced a processing issue resulting in about 20,000 people receiving wrong subsidies and grants. The ministry said then that those who received excess subsidy or grant amounts will not have to return them, while those who received less than they were entitled to will have the difference topped up by government agencies by November. Homes uses income information from the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS) to means-test individuals with business income, such as self-employed people - for selected subsidy schemes across the Government. What happened? For the 2025 year of assessment, IRAS' tax filing notification process began later in mid-January, compared to the preceding December in previous years, said MOH. This was to ensure CPF contributions for the full year were captured for more accurate income tax assessments. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore S'poreans aged 21 to 59 can claim $600 SG60 vouchers from July 22 Singapore Changi Airport handles 17.5 million passengers in Q2 2025 Singapore 2 charged over alleged involvement in posting of bail for man who subsequently absconded Singapore Teen charged after she allegedly sold vaporisers, put up WhatsApp ad showing e-cigarettes Life Having a workout partner could be the secret to sticking to your fitness goals Singapore 2,500 turtles seized in India and sent back to S'pore, put down humanely after salmonella detected Singapore LTA seeks tailored solutions to improve Bukit Panjang LRT's maintenance inspections Singapore Ports and planes: The 2 Singapore firms helping to keep the world moving However, the 'system logic' at the time caused Homes to omit the business income of selected individuals. This led to inaccurate means-testing for individuals with business income and members of their households between Jan 1 and Jan 27, 2025. MOH said that Homes was first alerted to the issue on Jan 13 through a member of public's query when applying for subsidies, which triggered an investigation leading to the identification of the issue. The ministry added that it is currently enhancing the design of Homes for better integration and coordination with agencies.

Straits Times
4 minutes ago
- Straits Times
Seabed-mining firm faces legal questions over controversial Trump policy
The Metals Company CEO Gerard Barron speaking at the opening of the company's public trading, at Times Square in Manhattan, in 2021. Two months ago, President Donald Trump took an extraordinary step toward issuing permits to mine vast tracts of the ocean floor in international waters where valuable minerals are abundant. It was a boon to The Metals Company, an ambitious startup that had already spent more than a half-billion dollars preparing to become the world's first commercial seabed miner. Within days of Mr Trump's executive order, the company submitted its application to the federal government. As a result, some of the company's international partners are now questioning their relationships with The Metals Company. Mr Trump's order conflicts with a long-standing treaty known as the Law of the Sea, potentially exposing them to legal risks. The issue with The Metals Company's seabed-mining application is that nearly every country in the world, but not the United States, has signed the Law of the Sea treaty. Its language is clear: Mining in areas outside a country's territorial waters before nations agree on how to handle the practice is not just a breach of international law, but an affront to 'the common heritage of mankind'. In May, a Japanese firm that The Metals Company has partnered with in the past to process minerals from seabed-mining test runs, said it was 'carefully discussing the matter with TMC,' citing the importance of doing business with companies 'via a route that has earned international credibility'. In June, the Dutch parliament, noting that The Metals Company would be using a ship belonging to Allseas, a half-Dutch company, voted to request that the Dutch government 'take and support any possible (legal) action against the US and The Metals Company' if they mine in international waters. At this month's meetings of the International Seabed Authority, or ISA, which is a United Nations-affiliated body that administers the Law of the Sea, delegates hotly debated whether to strip The Metals Company and its partners of exploration permits it had obtained through the ISA in recent years and would soon need to extend. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore S'poreans aged 21 to 59 can claim $600 SG60 vouchers from July 22 Singapore Miscalculated grants: Overpayments amounted to $7m for most people, a shortage of $2m to others, says MOH Singapore Changi Airport handles 17.5 million passengers in Q2 2025 Singapore 2 charged over alleged involvement in posting of bail for man who subsequently absconded Singapore Teen charged after allegedly selling vaporisers, advertising e-cigarettes on WhatsApp Life Having a workout partner could be the secret to sticking to your fitness goals Singapore 2,500 turtles seized in India and sent back to S'pore, put down humanely after salmonella detected Singapore Ports and planes: The 2 Singapore firms helping to keep the world moving In an interview on July 18, Gerard Barron, CEO of The Metals Company, dismissed the concerns. 'I see those threats as nothing but wing-flapping,' he said. Mr Barron said that because the United States was the world's most powerful economy, his company's international partners would simply have to deal with the impending reality of commercial seabed mining and adapt their stances on international law. He also said that his company's US permit to start mining in international waters would be issued 'sooner than people expect'. The Metals Company could process its minerals in Indonesia rather than Japan, Mr Barron said, noting that Indonesia and the United States signed a hard-fought trade agreement last week. And that Allseas could relocate out of the Netherlands, a move the company's CEO, Pieter Heerema, alluded to in recent comments to the Dutch press. 'We don't have to, but must be able to consider it,' Mr Heerema said. 'The Netherlands was attractive – now it isn't.' At a recent UN conference in France, Nathan Nagy, a legal adviser to the US State Department made a forceful speech defending his country's stance on seabed mining in international waters, reiterating that the United States has 'never considered' the Law of the Sea to 'reflect customary international law'. Mr Barron said his company opted to apply for a US permit because the ISA had failed for many years to issue the regulations necessary to begin issuing its own extraction permits in international waters. The ISA had pledged to settle those regulations by this year, but is widely expected to miss that deadline. Delegates at the ongoing ISA's talks in Kingston, Jamaica, described feverish, closed-door sessions filled with debate over how to address the Trump administration's decision to start allowing seabed mining in international waters. On July 21, the organisation's council, made up of 36 elected member states, stopped short of punitive action but passed a resolution urging the body's legal and technical committee to investigate 'noncompliance' by its signatories. ISA member states are bound by the Law of the Sea to prevent public and private entities in their countries from doing business with anyone mining without an ISA permit, which is precisely what The Metals Company is aiming to do. 'TMC has been testing the limits of what it can get away with, a bit like a child seeing how far it can go with bad behavior,' said Matthew Gianni, co-founder of the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition, who was present at the talks in Kingston. 'The member countries of the ISA have basically sent a shot across the bow, a warning to TMC that going rogue may well result in the loss of its ISA exploration claims,' he said. 'It also sends a signal to other companies that if they go the same route as TMC has, they may also face the same consequences.' The ISA's draft regulations, which already stretch to nearly 200 pages, remained largely unsettled. The process has been stymied by disagreements over environmental regulations, including how much sediment seabed miners would be allowed to put back in the water, as well as how much in royalties miners would owe to countries sponsoring their permits. The ISA's Brazilian secretary-general, Leticia Carvalho, told delegates in a speech that completing the regulations as soon as possible was 'the best tool we have to prevent the chaos that unilateral action could bring.' 'What will prevent the Wild West are the rules,' she said. The Metals Company's ISA-issued exploration permits were obtained through intermediaries in the small South Pacific island nations of Nauru and Tonga. They pertain to areas within a vast stretch of ocean floor about halfway between Mexico and Hawaii, called the Clarion-Clipperton Zone. The seabed there is blanketed with potato-size nodules containing large proportions of manganese and smaller amounts of nickel, cobalt and copper, all of which have growing uses in military equipment, electronics and large-scale industries such as steelmaking. The United States considers those metals critical to national security and has sought new sources of them because China dominates current supply chains. No commercial-scale seabed mining has ever taken place. The technological hurdles are high, and there have been serious concerns about the environmental consequences in the deep sea, a region of the planet that is little understood to science. Anticipating that mining would eventually be allowed, companies like Barron's have invested heavily in developing technologies to mine the ocean floors. This includes ships with huge claws that would extend down to the seabed, as well as autonomous vehicles attached to gargantuan vacuums that would scour the ocean floor. NYTIMES

Straits Times
30 minutes ago
- Straits Times
South Korea's President Lee orders all-out effort to find missing after floods
Find out what's new on ST website and app. The aftermath of a landslide on July 20, following days of torrential rain that triggered floods and landslides, in Sancheong county. SEOUL - South Korea's President Lee Jae-myung told public officials on July 22 to 'spare no effort' in the search for missing people and on damage recovery after days of torrential rains left a trail of destruction in various parts of the country. The wet weather has now subsided, though media reports said heavy rainfall was drenching parts of North Korea. Some 19 people have died and nine were still missing in South Korea as of the morning of July 22, while 2,549 people remained displaced, the Ministry of the Interior and Safety said. Damage to property was extensive with some 3,776 facilities, including homes, shops and factories needing to be cleared of water, debris and earth, it said. Noting the limitations of existing methods in coping with last week's rain, Mr Lee ordered the prime minister and all related ministries to establish a comprehensive response system for natural disasters by region and type. He also told a cabinet meeting to 'strictly crack down on mindless public officials who enjoy dancing and drinking at.. locations where people are dying'. The president's approval rating fell to 62.2 per cent from 64.6 per cent previously according to pollster Realmeter, in a survey conducted last week during the torrential rains. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore S'poreans aged 21 to 59 can claim $600 SG60 vouchers from July 22 Singapore Changi Airport handles 17.5 million passengers in Q2 2025 Singapore 2 charged over alleged involvement in posting of bail for man who subsequently absconded Singapore Teen charged after she allegedly sold vaporisers, put up WhatsApp ad showing e-cigarettes Life Having a workout partner could be the secret to sticking to your fitness goals Singapore 2,500 turtles seized in India and sent back to S'pore, put down humanely after salmonella detected Singapore LTA seeks tailored solutions to improve Bukit Panjang LRT's maintenance inspections Singapore Ports and planes: The 2 Singapore firms helping to keep the world moving Mr Lee, who took office in June, has promised to make the country safer and to prevent any repeat of the disasters in recent years that have often been blamed on the inadequate response by authorities. REUTERS