US FTC firings could put consumer rulings in legal limbo

Under the law, FTC commissioners can only be removed for good cause, such as neglecting their duties [File]
| Photo Credit: REUTERS

President Donald Trump’s firing of two commissioners at the Federal Trade Commission puts the U.S. consumer protection in uncharted waters, and its actions are in legal limbo until courts clarify the status of the fired commissioners, experts said.

Firing Alvaro Bedoya and Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, both Democrats, handed Trump’s FTC Chairman, Andrew Ferguson, an immediate Republican majority.

But using that majority to take action could run into legal hurdles, said Maureen Ohlhausen, a Republican former commissioner who served as acting FTC chair during part of Trump’s first term. If a court reinstates Bedoya and Slaughter, the agency could be required to review any votes that occurred in their absence, she said.

“We are certainly in uncharted waters,” Ohlhausen said.

If a trial court agrees with the Trump administration, “that situation could present the most uncertainty for business,” said Rahul Rao, a partner at White & Case who worked at the FTC from 2022 to 2025. A ruling for Trump would go against existing legal precedent, and inevitably end up before the U.S. Supreme Court, in a process that could take years, Rao said.

FTC Director of Public Affairs Joe Simonson said on Wednesday the removal of the two commissioners had not changed the agency’s approach. Ferguson has said before that he plans to keep pursuing cases against Amazon.com and Meta Platforms.

“In terms of holding Big Tech accountable, we are moving full steam ahead,” Simonson said. “That was true before and it is still true.”

Republicans would have soon gained a majority without the firings. Mark Meador, who Trump nominated to the commission in January, is being considered by the Senate. His confirmation would give Republicans a majority — regardless of whether or not Bedoya and Slaughter are reinstated.

Under the law, FTC commissioners can only be removed for good cause, such as neglecting their duties. The Trump administration has taken the position that a 1935 ruling upholding that law does not apply to the FTC as it exists today.

One court considering the FTC’s case against Asbury Automotive Group has already asked the agency to explain whether the firings affect its case.

A lack of bipartisanship could also affect how judges view future cases.

Before the firings, Judge Douglas Ginsburg, who sits on the federal appeals court in Washington, said at an event in February that losing dissenting voices on the commission would be a loss for judges who consider the FTC’s cases.

“If there is a dissent from the agency decision, it’s the first place you look” when deciding a case, Ginsburg said at the event in Washington sponsored by George Mason University.

Actions the FTC pursued under former Chair Lina Khan had a better track record in court when they were unanimously supported by the full bipartisan commission, Ohlhausen wrote in an article last year.