Trump’s actions on independent agencies ‘endanger’ workers, think tanks say

Summary

A joint report from the Economic Policy Institute and The Century Foundation, co-authored by former NLRB Chair Lauren McFerran, warns that President Trump’s recent moves to remove or exert control over leaders of independent federal agencies threaten worker and public protections. The report argues that agency independence, deliberately constructed by Congress to ensure expert-driven enforcement, is at risk if the White House can remove agency heads at will or otherwise dictate agency actions.

Key Points

The EPI/Century Foundation report finds Trump’s unilateral firings and pressure on independent agencies could undermine enforcement that protects workers, consumers and the public.
The report was co-authored by Lauren McFerran, former NLRB chair, who says independent agencies make expert, public‑interest decisions separate from presidential political aims.
Trump has removed several Democratic agency officials, including NLRB member Gwynne Wilcox, EEOC commissioners Jocelyn Samuels and Charlotte Burrows, and FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter.
The Supreme Court will hear Trump v. Slaughter on 8 December to consider whether presidents can remove independent agency heads — a review that could revisit the 1935 Humphrey’s Executor precedent.
If removal protections are eliminated, agency leaders may avoid enforcement or regulatory actions without White House sign‑off, weakening oversight of powerful actors.

Context and relevance

The case and report come amid broader debates about separation of powers and regulatory independence. For HR and compliance professionals, changes to agency independence could shift how aggressively agencies like the NLRB, EEOC and FTC pursue violations — affecting workplace enforcement, discrimination claims and corporate accountability. The Supreme Court decision could reset decades of administrative law and influence how agencies operate across administrations.

Why should I read this?

Because if you care about how workplace rules are enforced — or whether regulators actually bite — this explains the legal fight that could strip agencies of their teeth. Short version: it matters to workers, employers and anyone who relies on federal oversight. Reading this saves you the time of digging through the court docket and the think‑tank analysis yourself.

Author style

Punchy: the report isn’t merely academic — it flags an immediate threat to enforcement that affects real people. If the Court narrows agency protections, expect practical, fast changes in how enforcement plays out across workplaces and markets. This is significant for HR, compliance and legal teams; read the detail if you need to plan for regulatory shifts.