By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Trump administration has petitioned the Supreme Court for an emergency order to remove Lisa Cook from the Federal Reserve’s board of governors. This action follows a failed attempt by the administration to oust Cook, who was appointed by President Joe Biden, and is part of a larger effort to reshape the Fed. The legal challenge is unprecedented, as no president has previously fired a sitting Fed governor. The administration argues that Cook’s alleged actions regarding mortgage rates raise concerns about her trustworthiness and ability to manage interest rates, though she denies any wrongdoing and has not been charged with a crime.
Read the original article here
President Trump asks the Supreme Court for an emergency order to remove Lisa Cook from the Fed board, and the whole situation feels, well, insane. The core of the issue is straightforward: Trump is attempting to bypass the normal legal channels and get an immediate order from the Supreme Court to remove Lisa Cook.
The claims against Lisa Cook, the reason for the attempted removal, seem to have been debunked. Evidence indicates she did nothing wrong regarding the mortgage allegations, and yet, Trump is pressing forward. It’s important to note that a member of his own cabinet was found to have engaged in the very behavior Trump is accusing Cook of.
Adding to the confusion is the fact that Cook voted for a rate cut that Trump wanted. It seems like he’s not getting what he wants, and now, the Supreme Court is being brought into this. One has to wonder, is this really about alleged wrongdoing, or is it a reflection of something else entirely?
This entire situation is further complicated by the composition of the Supreme Court, a court that seems to be increasingly aligning with Trump’s wishes, at least in the eyes of some. The concern is that the court isn’t even bothering to provide sound legal reasoning for its decisions, appearing to simply rubber-stamp his requests. If the court agrees with Trump’s request, it could set a dangerous precedent.
Now, let’s consider the “emergency” aspect. What constitutes an emergency here? Trump and his allies are using the term “emergency” to justify extraordinary actions. This whole thing seems more like a grab for power. Trump was, after all, found guilty of the same types of things he is accusing Cook of.
It’s also worth pointing out that a non-independent Federal Reserve would be a disaster, potentially cratering confidence in the U.S. dollar and bonds. Politicized central banks have a history of leading to economic ruin. But, of course, we seem to be living in a world where anything can happen.
It’s easy to see this as another example of someone in a position of power trying to bend the rules to his will. It’s a pattern. And the court, whether willingly or not, is being put in a position to either uphold the law or enable what looks like an authoritarian maneuver.
Some people are concerned about a “slow-moving coup,” where the Supreme Court tacitly colludes with Trump to install a particular political regime. This case, and the court’s reaction, could be a major test of the court’s integrity. The possible consequences are significant. If the court rules in his favor, it could set the stage for Trump to target and remove anyone for any reason.
The question remains, is this a matter of legitimate concern or a power play? It’s becoming increasingly difficult to tell. The core claims of the request don’t appear to hold up.
The whole situation has a distinct sense of being a fabricated pretext. The president is acting like a petulant child because he was found guilty by the courts. The request reads like a desire to simply remove someone he doesn’t “like.”
Some feel that the Supreme Court has become corrupt, a tool for Trump’s agenda. Those who enable this, should this move be successful, may be remembered negatively.
The central question continues to be: What is the real reason behind all this? And what will the Supreme Court decide? The answer to the last question will have major ramifications on the future of the country, as well as the Supreme Court’s role in it.