A federal judge ruled that the removal of a Democratic member of the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) was unlawful, raising concerns about executive overreach and separation of powers. The FLRA, an independent agency responsible for managing labor relations for over two million government employees, had been under scrutiny after one of its members was dismissed last month.
The official, Susan Tsui Grundmann, had been serving a term that was set to expire in July. Her removal was challenged in court, where she argued that the agency was meant to function independently and should not be subject to abrupt political shifts. The court sided with her, declaring the action unconstitutional.
The Justice Department defended the dismissal by invoking Article II of the Constitution, arguing that the executive branch has broad authority to remove officials. The judge, however, disagreed, emphasizing the system of checks and balances established to prevent excessive concentration of power in any one branch of government. The ruling stated that allowing such removals would undermine fundamental constitutional protections.
Grundmann is one of several officials who have recently challenged their removals in court. Over the past two months, numerous government employees have been dismissed in a broader effort to streamline operations and reduce costs. At the Department of Agriculture alone, nearly 6,000 employees have been let go.
The ruling reinstates Grundmann until the completion of her term. The court found that the FLRA was created to function independently, with members appointed for fixed terms and removable only under specific conditions such as inefficiency or misconduct. No previous administration had removed a member in the agency’s history.
The Justice Department argued that the court lacked the authority to reinstate Grundmann, asserting that the only available remedy was financial compensation for wrongful termination. The judge rejected this argument, stating that courts have a duty to enforce the law and prevent executive overreach.
In a separate but similar case, a recent appeals court decision upheld the dismissal of another federal official, Hampton Dellinger, who had been appointed to enforce whistleblower protections. His removal had initially been blocked by a lower court, but a three-judge panel ruled in favor of allowing the dismissal.
The conflicting decisions indicate that legal battles over the limits of executive power will likely continue. The outcome of these cases could set significant precedents regarding the authority of independent agencies and the extent to which a president can remove appointed officials.
