The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to overturn a lower court ruling that temporarily reinstated Hampton Dellinger as head of the Office of Special Counsel (OSC), marking the first major legal appeal of Trump's second term. The emergency petition, filed by acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris, argues that the court must intervene to protect presidential authority, calling Dellinger's reinstatement "an unprecedented assault on the separation of powers."
Dellinger, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden, was dismissed by Trump earlier this month as part of a broader effort to reshape the federal bureaucracy. His office plays a key role in protecting whistleblowers, investigating alleged government misconduct, and ensuring compliance with the Hatch Act, which limits political activity by federal employees. The Justice Department contends that the president has the right to remove executive branch officials at will, an argument that has been central to Trump's sweeping restructuring of federal agencies since taking office in January.
The request to the Supreme Court follows a decision by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Saturday to reject the administration's appeal on procedural grounds. In its filing, the Justice Department emphasized the urgency of the case, arguing that no court in history has ever "forced the President to retain an agency head whom the President believes should not be entrusted with executive power." The administration is seeking an emergency ruling to prevent Dellinger from resuming his duties while litigation continues.
Dellinger has challenged his dismissal, claiming that federal law protects him from removal except for cause, such as misconduct or poor performance-reasons that were not cited in his termination email. His attorney, Joshua Matz, declined to comment on the Supreme Court petition. If the high court agrees to hear the case, the justices could issue a decision as early as Tuesday, following the Presidents' Day holiday weekend.
The battle over Dellinger's firing is part of a broader legal war that has erupted since Trump's return to office. The administration faces more than 40 lawsuits challenging executive actions taken since Inauguration Day, including policies on immigration, federal employee buyouts, and the restructuring of government agencies under Elon Musk's newly created Department of Government Efficiency. Legal experts predict that many of these cases will eventually reach the Supreme Court.
John Malcolm, vice president of the Heritage Foundation's Institute for Constitutional Government, said Trump's aggressive approach to executive power was expected. "President Trump is certainly being aggressive in terms of flexing executive power, and it's not at all surprising that these actions are being challenged," Malcolm told Fox News Digital.
The Trump administration's legal battles are playing out in courts across the country, with many lawsuits filed in traditionally liberal jurisdictions such as the D.C. federal court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Ninth Circuit, known for its progressive rulings, has one of the highest reversal rates at the Supreme Court, a dynamic that could influence how these cases ultimately unfold.
The administration's legal setbacks have not been limited to the Dellinger case. In a separate ruling, a Rhode Island federal judge ordered the Trump administration to unfreeze federal funds after determining it had not complied with a previous order. The administration swiftly appealed to the First Circuit Court of Appeals, which denied the request, adding another layer of legal hurdles for Trump's policy agenda.
Dellinger's case is one of several involving the dismissal of Senate-confirmed officials. Other lawsuits have been filed by eight agency inspectors general and Democratic appointees to the National Labor Relations Board, Federal Labor Relations Authority, and Merit Systems Protection Board, all of whom were ousted as part of Trump's effort to reshape the federal government.
The Supreme Court's ruling on the Dellinger case could set a precedent for how much latitude the president has in removing federal officials. If the justices side with the administration, it could pave the way for further dismissals of government watchdogs and independent agency heads, solidifying Trump's control over the executive branch. Conversely, a decision in Dellinger's favor would pose a significant check on presidential power and bolster protections for federal officials who oversee government accountability.
