In a landmark 5-4 ruling on June 30, 2026, the US Supreme Court blocked President Donald Trump's attempt to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, preserving the central bank's long-standing independence from direct political interference. The decision, written by Chief Justice John Roberts and joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, allows Cook to remain in her post while her lawsuit challenging the firing continues through the courts.

Cook was the first Governor to be fired in the central bank's 111-year history. Trump moved to fire Cook from the Fed Board last August amid similar efforts to fire officials appointed by Democrats at a slew of multi-member independent agencies, and as Trump frequently voiced frustrations with the Fed's interest rate decisions. The president claimed Cook made misrepresentations on mortgage filings related to two properties, one in Michigan and another in Georgia, before she was nominated to the Fed by President Joe Biden in 2021.

What the Court Actually Ruled

In a 5-4 ruling, Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the court's majority, upheld limits Congress imposed on a president's attempt to remove members of the Fed as a legitimate protection of the institution's historical independence. While the president has the ability to fire Cook "for cause," he wrote, "the President failed to afford Cook the procedural protections to which she was entitled by statute. Without such protections, she could not properly dispute the charges the President laid against her."

In a footnote, Roberts said the ruling did not bar Trump from trying again to remove Cook over the alleged mortgage fraud if he chose to do so. But the ruling said Trump's first attempt failed because Cook was not given the due process she was owed under federal law. Any new move against her would require additional steps, including an explanation of the evidence against her, a way for her to respond, and a deadline for that response.

Cook Calls It a "Manufactured Pretext"

Cook said her case was "never about mortgage documents signed years before I became a Federal Reserve governor." "It was an attempt to remove me on a manufactured pretext because I refused to bow to political pressure and continued to set interest rates based only on what would best serve the American people. That is the most fundamental obligation of a Federal Reserve governor," Cook said in a statement.

The true motivation for trying to fire Cook, Trump's critics say, is the Republican president's desire to exert control over US interest rate policy. If Trump succeeds in removing Cook, the first Black woman to be a Federal Reserve governor, he could replace her with his own appointee and gain a majority on the Fed's board.

Fed Independence vs. Presidential Power

The Supreme Court dramatically expanded presidential power in the same ruling, upholding Trump's firings of the heads of other independent federal agencies — with the Federal Reserve as one important exception. The distinction drawn by the court reflects a long-held view that the Fed's role in setting interest rates demands a higher degree of insulation from political pressure than other executive agencies. For full coverage of the ruling and its constitutional implications, see reporting from CNBC.

Trump Vows to Act Again

Trump, in a post on Truth Social after the ruling, said the court had sent the case back "on a strictly procedural basis" and vowed to take further action against Cook. "We will take appropriate action immediately to make sure that someone who has committed wrongdoing will not be making vital decisions concerning the Welfare of the United States of America," Trump wrote. The legal battle is far from over, as no lower court has yet thoroughly examined the full constitutional and legal questions surrounding the dispute, meaning the case is likely to return to the Supreme Court in the months ahead.