President Trump scores a major victory as the DC Circuit Court of Appeals validates his authority to fire Biden appointee Hampton Dellinger, overturning a controversial lower court ruling by Obama-appointed Judge Amy Berman Jackson that had temporarily kept the Special Counsel in office against the President’s wishes.
Key Takeaways
- The DC Circuit Court of Appeals has allowed President Trump to remove Hampton Dellinger from his position as Special Counsel while legal proceedings continue.
- Dellinger had previously used his position to push for the reinstatement of thousands of fired probationary federal employees, directly opposing Trump administration policies.
- The ruling marks a significant win for presidential authority over executive branch appointees, with implications for Trump’s ability to implement his agenda.
- The case is expected to ultimately reach the Supreme Court, potentially setting a crucial precedent on executive power.
- This decision follows a pattern of Trump successfully challenging limitations on presidential authority to control executive branch officials.
Presidential Authority Prevails in Court
In a decisive win for executive authority, President Donald Trump has once again been permitted to remove Special Counsel Hampton Dellinger from office after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia vacated an earlier decision blocking the termination. This ruling effectively overturns U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson’s previous order that had temporarily reinstated Dellinger to his position at the Office of Special Counsel. The appeals court decision represents a significant development in the ongoing struggle between the Trump administration and Biden-era appointees who have remained in government roles.
The legal battle began when President Trump issued a termination notice to Dellinger on February 7, 2025, without providing specific justification. Dellinger, who was appointed by former President Biden and confirmed by the Senate in 2024 for a five-year term, immediately filed a lawsuit challenging his dismissal. He cited statutory language that ostensibly protected the Special Counsel from removal except “for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” Judge Jackson had agreed with this interpretation when she initially blocked Trump’s action.
Supreme Court Suspends Dismissal of Hampton Dellinger Appointed by Biden Administration, Will Remain in Position Until February 26
February 22: The U.S. Supreme Court has halted an attempt by the Trump administration to remove Hampton Dellinger, who was appointed by former… pic.twitter.com/r9iCstaXUC
— CSB News USA (@csbnewsus) February 22, 2025
The Battle Over Federal Employment Protections
The conflict between Dellinger and the Trump administration extends beyond a simple personnel matter. As head of the Office of Special Counsel, Dellinger had been actively working to reverse Trump administration efforts to streamline the federal workforce. Most notably, he had secured a controversial ruling from a government panel that called for the reinstatement of over 5,000 employees fired by the Trump administration at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, arguing that their terminations during probationary periods were unlawful.
“Calling on all federal agencies to voluntarily and immediately rescind any unlawful terminations of probationary employees,” Dellinger said.
This activism directly contradicted Trump’s efforts to reduce bureaucratic bloat and remove ineffective federal employees, making Dellinger a prime target for removal. The Trump administration has maintained that the law protecting the Special Counsel from dismissal is fundamentally unconstitutional, citing recent Supreme Court precedents that have expanded presidential authority over executive branch officials. The DC Circuit Court appears to have found merit in this argument, at least enough to allow Dellinger’s removal while the full case proceeds.
Legal Implications and Supreme Court Prospects
The case is now being expedited through the court system, with briefing materials due by April 11. In the interim, Dellinger is explicitly barred from serving as Special Counsel, a significant victory for the Trump administration. Legal experts expect the matter to eventually reach the Supreme Court, as it touches on fundamental questions about the separation of powers and the president’s constitutional authority to control executive branch officials. The case parallels a previous Supreme Court ruling that allowed Trump to fire the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Dellinger’s attorneys have argued that allowing the president to fire the Special Counsel without cause could undermine the office’s independence and its critical role in protecting whistleblowers and investigating wrongdoing within the federal government. However, conservatives counter that unelected bureaucrats shouldn’t be insulated from presidential control, as this creates an unaccountable “fourth branch” of government that was not intended by the Constitution. This tension between bureaucratic independence and democratic accountability lies at the heart of the legal battle.
A Pattern of Restoring Executive Authority
This case represents just one front in President Trump’s broader effort to reassert control over the executive branch after what many conservatives view as decades of erosion in presidential authority. Throughout his previous term and continuing into his current administration, Trump has consistently challenged restrictions on his ability to remove appointees and officials who oppose his policy agenda. These efforts have largely been successful at the Supreme Court level, with justices increasingly skeptical of independent agencies that operate without meaningful presidential oversight.
The Dellinger case may ultimately prove to be another landmark in this ongoing constitutional rebalancing. For frustrated conservatives who have long complained about the “deep state” obstructing elected officials, the appeals court’s decision represents a welcome assertion that the president, not unelected bureaucrats, should have the final say over executive branch personnel and policy. As the legal battle continues to unfold, the stakes remain high for both administrative governance and constitutional principles.
Sources:
- The fired head of a federal watchdog agency says he’s ending his legal fight
- Official who fought to reinstate fired probationary feds can be removed during legal fight, court says – Government Executive
- Biden Official Who Trump Fired and Was Reinstated by an Obama Judge Has Been Fired Again – RedState
