interest rate

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday put off a decision on whether President Trump can fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook and said it would hear arguments on the case in January.

The court’s action allows Cook to remain in her position, and it prevents Trump from taking majority control of the historically independent central bank board.

Last month, the president said he fired Cook “for cause,” citing mortgage documents she signed in 2021 confirming that two different properties were her primary residence.

But the flap over her mortgages arose as Trump complained that the Federal Reserve Board, including Cook, had not lowered interest rates to his satisfaction.

“We will have a majority very shortly,” Trump said after he fired Cook.

In September, Trump appointed Stephen Miran, the chair of of his White House Council of Economic Advisers, to serve a temporary term on the seven-member Federal Reserve Board. He joined two other Trump appointees.

Congress wrote the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 intending to give the central bank board some independence from politics and the current president.

Its seven members are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, and they serve staggered terms of 14 years, unless “removed for cause by the president.”

The law does not define what amounts to cause.

President Biden appointed Cook to a temporary term in 2022 and to a full term a year later.

In August, Bill Pulte, Trump’s director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, alleged that Cook committed mortgage fraud when she took out two housing loans in 2021. One was for $203,000 for a house in Ann Arbor, Mich., and the second was for $540,000 for a condo in Atlanta. In both instances, he said she signed a loan document saying the property would be her primary residence.

Mortgage lenders usually offer a lower interest rate for a borrower’s primary residence.

Cook has not directly refuted the allegation about her mortgage documents, but her attorneys said she told the lender she was seeking the Atlanta condo as a vacation home.

Trump, however, sent Cook a letter on Aug. 25 that said, “You may be removed, at my discretion, for cause,” citing the law and Pulte’s referral. “I have determined that there is sufficient cause to remove you from your position,” he wrote.

Cook refused to step down and filed a suit to challenge the decision. She argued the allegation did not amount to cause under the law, and she had not been given a hearing to contest it.

A federal judge in Washington agreed and blocked her firing, noting that unproven allegation of mortgage fraud occurred before she was appointed to the Federal Reserve.

In a 2-1 vote, the appeals court also refused to uphold her firing.

Trump’s lawyers sent an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court on Sept. 18 arguing Congress gave the president the authority to fire a Fed governor he concludes she is not trustworthy.

“Put simply, the President may reasonably determine that interest rates paid by the American people should not be set by a Governor who appears to have lied about facts material to the interest rates she secured for herself — and refuses to explain the apparent misrepresentations,” wrote Trump Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer.

But the justices refused to act on an emergency appeal and decided they will give the case a full hearing and a written decision.

WASHINGTON — President Trump said Monday night that he’s firing Federal Reserve Gov. Lisa Cook, an unprecedented move that would constitute a sharp escalation in his battle to exert greater control over what has long been considered an institution independent from day-to-day politics.

Trump said in a letter posted on his Truth Social platform that he is removing Cook effective immediately because of allegations that she committed mortgage fraud. Bill Pulte, a Trump appointee to the agency that regulates mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, made the accusations last week.

Pulte alleged that Cook had claimed two primary residences — in Ann Arbor, Mich., and Atlanta — in 2021 to get better mortgage terms. Mortgage rates are often higher on second homes or those purchased to rent.

Trump’s move is likely to touch off an extensive legal battle that will probably go to the Supreme Court and could disrupt financial markets, potentially pushing interest rates higher.

The independence of the Fed is considered critical to its ability to fight inflation because it enables it to take unpopular steps such as raising interest rates. If bond investors start to lose faith that the Fed will be able to control inflation, they will demand higher rates to own bonds, pushing up borrowing costs for mortgages, car loans and business loans.

Legal scholars noted that the allegations are likely a pretext for the president to open up another seat on the seven-member board so he can appoint a loyalist to push for his long-stated goal of lower interest rates.

Fed governors vote on the central bank’s interest rate decisions and on issues of financial regulation. Although they are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, they are not like Cabinet secretaries, who serve at the pleasure of the president. They serve 14-year terms that are staggered in an effort to insulate the Fed from political influence.

No president has sought to fire a Fed governor before. In recent decades, presidents of both parties have largely respected Fed independence, though Richard Nixon and Lyndon Johnson put heavy pressure on the Fed during their presidencies — mostly behind closed doors.

Still, that behind-the-scenes pressure to keep interest rates low, the same goal sought by Trump, has widely been blamed for touching off rampant inflation in the late 1960s and ‘70s.

The announcement came days after Cook said she wouldn’t leave despite Trump previously calling for her to resign. “I have no intention of being bullied to step down from my position because of some questions raised in a tweet,” Cook said in a previous statement issued by the Fed.

Senate Democrats had expressed support for Cook, who has not been charged with wrongdoing.

Another Fed governor, Adriana Kugler, stepped down unexpectedly Aug. 1, and Trump has nominated one of his economic advisors, Stephen Miran, to fill out the remainder of her term until January.

“The Federal Reserve has tremendous responsibility for setting interest rates and regulating reserve member banks. The American people must have the full confidence in the honesty of the members entrusted with setting policy and overseeing the Federal Reserve,” Trump wrote in a letter addressed to Cook, a copy of which he posted online. “In light of your deceitful and potentially criminal conduct in a financial matter, they cannot and I do not have such confidence in your integrity.”

Trump argued that firing Cook was constitutional, even if doing so will raise questions about control of the Fed as an independent entity.

“The executive power of the United States is vested to me as President and, as President, I have a solemn duty that the laws of the United States are faithfully enacted,” the president wrote in the letter to Cook. “I have determined that faithfully enacting the law requires your immediate removal from office.”

Among the unresolved legal questions are whether Cook could be allowed to remain in her seat while the case plays out. She may have to fight the legal battle herself, as the injured party, rather than the Fed.

In the meantime, Trump’s announcement drew swift rebuke from advocates and former Fed officials who worry that Trump is trying to exert too much power and control over the nation’s central bank.

“The President’s effort to fire a sitting Federal Reserve Governor is part of a concerted effort to transform the financial regulators from independent watchdogs into obedient lapdogs that do as they’re told. This could have real consequences for Americans feeling the squeeze from higher prices,” Rohit Chopra, former director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, said in a statement.

It is the latest effort by the administration to take control over one of the few remaining independent agencies in Washington. Trump has repeatedly attacked the Fed’s chair, Jerome H. Powell, for not cutting its short-term interest rate, and even threatened to fire him.

Forcing Cook off the Fed’s governing board would provide Trump an opportunity to appoint a loyalist. Trump has said he would appoint only officials who would support cutting rates.

Powell signaled last week that the Fed may cut rates soon even as inflation risks remain moderate. Meanwhile, Trump will be able to replace Powell in May 2026, when Powell’s term expires. However, 12 members of the Fed’s interest-rate-setting committee have a vote on whether to raise or lower interest rates, so even replacing the chair might not guarantee that Fed policy will shift the way Trump wants.

Rugaber and Weissert write for the Associated Press.

President Trump is once again floating the idea of firing Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, ostensibly in objection to excessively high interest rates. But this debate is not about monetary policy. It’s a power play aimed at subordinating America’s central bank to the fiscal needs of the executive branch and Congress. In other words, we have a textbook case of “fiscal dominance” on our hands — and that always ends poorly.

I’m no cheerleader for Powell. During the COVID-19 pandemic, he enthusiastically backed every stimulus package, regardless of size or purpose, as if these involved no trade-offs. Where were the calls for “Fed independence” then? And where were the calls for fiscal restraint after the emergency was over?

Powell failed to anticipate the worst inflation in four decades and repeated for far too long the absurd claim that it was “transitory” even as mounting evidence showed otherwise. He blamed supply-side disruptions long after ports had reopened and goods were moving.

And as inflation was taking a stubborn hold, Powell delayed raising interest rates — possibly to shield the Biden administration from the fiscal fallout of the debt it was piling on — well past the point when monetary tightening was needed.

If this weren’t the world of government, where failure can be rewarded — and if there had been a more obvious alternative — Powell wouldn’t have been invited back for another term. But he was. And so Trump’s pressure campaign to prematurely end Powell’s tenure is dangerous.

I get why with budget deficits exploding and debt-service costs surging, the president wants lower interest rates. That would make the cost of his own fiscal agenda appear more tolerable. Trump likely believes he’s justified because he believes that his tax cuts and deregulation are about to spur huge economic growth.

To be sure, some growth will result, though the effects of deregulation will take a while to arrive. But gains could be swamped by the negative consequences of Trump’s tariffs and erratic tariff threats. No matter what, the new growth won’t lead to enough new tax revenue to escape the need for the government to borrow more. And the more the government borrows, the more intense the pressure on interest rates.

One thing is for sure: The pressure Trump and his people are exerting on the Fed is a push for fiscal dominance. The executive branch wants to use the central bank as a tool to accommodate the government’s frenzy of reckless borrowing. Such political control of a central bank is a hallmark of failed monetary systems in weak institutional settings. History shows where that always leads: to inflation, economic stagnation and financial instability.

So far, Powell is resisting cutting rates, hence the barrage of insults and threat of firing. But now is not the right time to play with fire. Bond yields surged last year as investors reckoned with the scale of U.S. borrowing. They crossed the 5% threshold again recently. Moody’s even stripped the government of its prized AAA credit rating. Lower interest rates from the Fed — especially if seen as the result of raw political pressure — could further diminish the allure of U.S. Treasuries.

While the Fed can temporally influence interest rates, especially in the short run, it cannot override long-term fears of inflation, economic sluggishness and political manipulation of monetary policy driven by unsustainable fiscal policy. That’s where confidence matters, and confidence is eroding.

This is why markets are demanding a premium for funds loaned to a government that is now $36 trillion in debt and shows no intention of slowing down. But it could get worse. If the average interest rate on U.S. debt climbs from 3.3% to 5%, interest payments alone could soar from $900 billion to $2 trillion annually. That would make debt service by far the single largest item in the federal budget — more than Medicare, Social Security, the military or any other program readers care about. And because much of this debt rolls over quickly, higher rates hit fast.

At the end of the day, the bigger problem isn’t Powell’s monetary policy. It’s the federal government’s spending addiction. Trump’s call to replace Powell with someone who will cut rates ignores the real math. Lower short-term interest rates will do only so much if looser monetary policy is perceived as a means of masking reckless budget deficits. That would make higher inflation a certainty, not merely a possibility. It might not arrive before the next election, but it will inevitably arrive.

There is still time to avoid this cliff. Trump is right to worry about surging debt costs, but he’s targeting a symptom. The solution isn’t to fire Powell — it’s to cure the underlying disease, which is excessive government spending.

Veronique de Rugy is a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. This article was produced in collaboration with Creators Syndicate.