Trump Files Emergency Request With Supreme Court To Make Lisa Cook Fired Again

The Trump administration filed an emergency request with the Supreme Court on Thursday to allow it to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook from the central bank’s board while a lawsuit plays out in lower court over Cook’s ouster by President Trump last month. 

The request comes after a federal appeals court in Washington DC rejected the administration’s attempt to remove an order blocking Cook’s removal in a 2-1 decision the night before the Fed’s meeting earlier this week.

“This application involves yet another case of improper judicial interference with the President’s removal authority — here, interference with the President’s authority to remove members of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors for cause,” wrote  the administration’s lawyer, Solicitor General John Sauer. 

According to court filings, the Trump administration maintains that Cook committed mortgage fraud based on evidence provided by Federal Housing Finance Agency director Bill Pulte – which showed that Cook claimed two properties as her primary residence within weeks of each other. 

On Aug. 25, Trump announced that he was firing Cook from the seven-member Fed Board. Cook sued in response, resulting in a federal district court on Sept. 9 barring her removal while the suit plays out – which the appeals court upheld.

Sauer says that the Supreme Court, for various reasons, should stay the district court judge’s preliminary injunction reinstating Cook to the Fed, claiming that the DOJ is likely to prevail in the lawsuit “because Cook lacks a Fifth Amendment property interest in her continued service as a Governor of the Federal Reserve System,” and her job is not protected by due process considerations.

Sauer also disputed the judge’s alternative finding that Cook’s firing “for cause” was invalid because the alleged conduct occurred before she was appointed to the Fed.

“The Federal Reserve Act’s broad ‘for cause’ provision rules out removal for no reason at all, or for policy disagreement,” he wrote, adding “But so long as the President identifies a cause, the determination of ‘some cause relating to the conduct, ability, fitness, or competence of the officer’ is within the President’s unreviewable discretion.”

“Cook had made contradictory representations in two mortgage agreements a short time apart, claiming that both a property in Michigan and a property in Georgia would simultaneously serve as her principal residence,” Sauer continued. “Each mortgage agreement described the representation as material to the lender, reflecting the reality that lenders usually offer lower interest rates for principal-residence mortgages because they view such mortgages as less risky.”

“When her apparent misconduct came to light, the President determined that Cook’s ‘deceitful and potentially criminal conduct in a financial matter’ renders her unfit to continue serving on the Federal Reserve Board, and at a minimum demonstrates ‘the sort of gross negligence in financial transactions that calls into question [her] competence and trustworthiness as a financial regulator.” 

Sauer also says that the district court judge “lacked authority to order reinstatement as an equitable remedy for the removal of an officer of the United States, as we have discussed in several recent stay applications.”

Cook has denied wrongdoing, and has argued that unproven allegations are not sufficient grounds for removing the Biden appointee.