Bessent v. Dellinger

Last updated

Bessent v. Dellinger
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Supreme Court of the United States
Full case nameScott Bessent, Secretary of the Treasury, et al. v. Hampton Dellinger, Special Counsel of the Office of Special Counsel
Docket no. 24A790

Bessent v. Dellinger was a 2025 case in which lawyer Hampton Dellinger challenged his firing from the United States Office of Special Counsel.

Contents

On February 12, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a temporary restraining order preventing Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent and several other officials from executing this without-cause firing until a February 26 hearing. [1] [2] [3] In this first case involving the second presidency of Donald Trump to reach the Supreme Court, the court allowed the order to stand given its short duration. [4]

The District Court later ruled that Dellinger should remain at his post, stating that the Office of Special Counsel must be independent or it cannot perform its function. [5] [6] On March 5, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit lifted the injunction pending appeal, allowing Dellinger's firing to go into effect. Dellinger dropped his lawsuit the following day.

Firing

On February 7, 2025, the White House Presidential Personnel Office fired Hampton Dellinger from his position as head of the Office of Special Counsel. This Office of Special Counsel is an independent agency established in the 1970s to investigate retaliation against government whistleblowers and other civil service crimes. By law, the President can only dismiss its head for "inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office." The email that the Presidential Personnel Office sent to Dellinger did not cite any of these reasons. Dellinger sued, arguing that he had been illegally fired. Dellinger was nominated by President Joe Biden in 2023 and confirmed by the Senate the following year for a five-year term. [7] [8]

Temporary restraining order

On February 12, 2024, Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the US District Court for the District of Columbia issued a two-week temporary restraining order allowing Dellinger to maintain his position until his hearing for a preliminary injunction. [8]

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit left this order in place three days later in a 2–1 opinion, saying that Trump's claims of extraordinary harm failed to justify an immediate appeal from the District Court. [1] [8] The two supporting judges, Florence Pan and J. Michelle Childs, were both appointed by President Joe Biden, while the dissenting judge, Gregory Katsas, was appointed during Trump's first term. [2]

Appeal to Supreme Court

President Trump appealed the case to the Supreme Court, arguing that judicial limits on his Executive Branch authority would violate the separation of powers. [7] [8] Among four amicus briefs filed before the Supreme Court, multiple state governments wrote to support Trump's authority to fire Dellinger. [9] The New Civil Liberties Alliance similarly argued that the president must have "absolute removal authority." [10]

Conversely, a group of former public officials asked the Court to uphold the temporary restraining order, opining that the Supreme Court should decide the case's constitutional questions after the District Court's proceedings. [11] Another brief submitted by financial regulation professors advocated for preserving Federal Reserve's independence regardless of the Supreme Court's overall holding. [12]

In an unsigned opinion issued on February 21, 2025, the Supreme Court chose to hold the motion to vacate the District Court's temporary restraining order in abeyance until its expiration, effectively allowing the order to stand. The Supreme Court opined that the imminent end of this temporary restraining order made appellate interference unnecessary. [13]

Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote that they would outright deny the application to vacate. Conversely, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote a dissent joined by Justice Samuel Alito. Gorsuch cited Grupo Mexicano de Desarrollo, S.A. v. Alliance Bond Fund, Inc. (1999) and In re Sawyer (1888) respectively for the propositions that the equitable remedies of federal courts are limited to those available when the Judiciary Act of 1789 was passed, and that by 1888 it was "well settled that a court of equity has no jurisdiction over the appointment and removal of public officers." [13]

Further proceedings

On February 26, Judge Amy Berman Jackson extended the temporary restraining order through March 1 so that she could write an opinion. [14]

On March 1, she made the injunction against the firing permanent and forbade the administration from acting in any way as if Dellinger had been removed. In her 67-page opinion, Judge Jackson stressed that Congress had made the Office of Special Counsel independent because it could not otherwise perform its function of preventing patronage and corruption in the Executive Branch. [5] [6]

On March 5, the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit stayed the district court's order of March 1, except to the extent that order vacated the temporary restraining order of February 12. The appellate court's order "gives effect to the removal of appellee from his position as Special Counsel of the U.S. Office of Special Counsel." [15] [16] [17] Dellinger then dropped his lawsuit, accepting his dismissal. [18]

References

  1. 1 2 "USCA Case #25-5028" (PDF). February 15, 2025. Retrieved February 18, 2025.
  2. 1 2 Alex Lemonides; Seamus Hughes; Mattathias Schwartz; Lazaro Gamio (February 17, 2025). "Tracking the Lawsuits Against Trump's Agenda". New York Times. Retrieved February 18, 2025.
  3. ↑ "Bessent v. Dellinger". SCOTUSBlog. Retrieved February 18, 2025.
  4. ↑ John Fritze (February 18, 2025). "What to know about Trump's appeal to the Supreme Court". CNN. Retrieved February 18, 2025.
  5. 1 2 Zach Montague (March 1, 2025). "Judge Rules Trump Can't Fire Head of Federal Watchdog Agency Without Cause". New York Times. Retrieved March 1, 2025.
  6. 1 2 Amy Berman Jackson (March 1, 2025). "Civil Action No. 25-0385 (ABJ)" (PDF). Retrieved March 1, 2025.
  7. 1 2 Daniel Barnes; Michael Kosnar; Megan Lebowitz (February 16, 2025). "Trump administration to ask Supreme Court to keep fired government watchdog off the job as case pends". NBC. Retrieved February 18, 2025.
  8. 1 2 3 4 Adam Liptak (February 16, 2025). "First Test of Trump's Power to Fire Officials Reaches Supreme Court". New York Times. Retrieved February 18, 2025.
  9. ↑ James Uthemeier; Jeffrey Paul DeSousa; Nathan A. Forrester; David M. Costello; Darrick W. Monson (February 19, 2025). "BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE FLORIDA AND 19 OTHER STATES IN SUPPORT OF THE SECRETARY'S APPLICATION TO VACATE THE ORDER OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT" (PDF). Retrieved February 21, 2025.
  10. ↑ Gregory Dolin; Philip Hamburger; Markham S. Chenoweth; Margot J. Cleveland (February 18, 2025). "On Application to Vacate the Order Issued by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and Request for an Immediate Administrative Stay" (PDF). New Civil Liberties Alliance . Retrieved February 21, 2025.
  11. ↑ Michael Lieder; Norman L. Eisen; Tianna J. Mays; Jon M. Greenbaum (February 18, 2025). "On Application to Vacate the Order Issued by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia Circuit and Request for an Immediate Administrative Stay to the Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts: BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE FORMER PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND LEGAL SCHOLARS IN OPPOSITION TO APPLICATION TO VACATE AND REQUEST FOR AN IMMEDIATE STAY" (PDF). Retrieved February 21, 2025.
  12. ↑ Steven A. Hirsch (February 18, 2025). "On Application for Stay Pending Appeal to Chief Justice John Roberts: BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE LAW PROFESSORS REGARDING THE GOVERNMENT'S "APPLICATION TO VACATE THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND REQUEST FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE STAY"" (PDF). Retrieved February 21, 2025.
  13. 1 2 Bessent v. Dellinger, 604U.S.____ (2025).
  14. ↑ Adam Liptak (February 26, 2025). "Trump Seeks Prompt Supreme Court Review of His Power to Fire Officials". New York Times. Retrieved February 27, 2025.
  15. ↑ (Order of U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Docket No. 25-5052,March 5, 2025), Text .
  16. ↑ "Trump administration can remove head of federal watchdog agency, appeals court rules". National Public Radio. Associated Press. March 5, 2025. Retrieved March 5, 2025.
  17. ↑ Devan Cole (March 5, 2025). "Appeals court allows Trump to remove head of federal watchdog agency for now". CNN. Retrieved March 5, 2025.
  18. ↑ Rosen, Jacob; Quinn, Melissa (March 6, 2025). "Head of federal whistleblower office drops legal battle challenging his firing". CBS News . Retrieved March 6, 2025.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.