The Trump administration has formally asked the U.S. Supreme Court to lift a lower court order preventing the removal of Hampton Dellinger, the head of the Office of Special Counsel (OSC).
The administration argues that the ruling is an “unprecedented assault on the separation of powers” and requires immediate intervention.
The emergency application, submitted on Sunday, cites key Supreme Court precedents, including Seila Law LLC v. CFPB and Collins v. Yellen, both of which reaffirmed a president’s authority to remove agency heads at will.
The filing also references Trump v. United States, where the Court pointed out that the president’s management of the executive branch necessitates “unrestricted power” over the removal of agency officials. The administration contends that any judicial restriction on this power would cause “the gravest of injuries on the Executive Branch.”
Legal Dispute Over the Special Counsel’s Removal
Dellinger, who led the OSC, was removed by Trump in January. He swiftly challenged the firing, arguing it violated 5 U.S.C. § 1211(b), which allows the removal of the Special Counsel only for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.”
A district court granted an emergency restraining order, temporarily blocking the dismissal until a full review of the case.
On Saturday, a federal appeals court declined to lift the restraining order, citing a lack of jurisdiction to intervene. This has escalated the legal battle to the Supreme Court, where the administration is pushing for swift action.
Implications for the Separation of Powers
The OSC, established in 1979, functions as a watchdog agency, protecting federal employees who report government misconduct. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for the executive branch’s authority over independent federal agencies and whistleblower protections.
The Supreme Court’s decision on whether to hear the case and rule on the injunction is expected to shape the future of executive power and agency independence.
