Rebecca Slaughter was a member of the Federal Trade Commission, appointed by Trump to a Democratic seat in 2018, then reappointed for a second term by Biden in 2023. In 2025, Trump fired her and another member of the commission. She challenged her dismissal in court, because she had been removed without cause. On June 29, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the President could fire members of independent commissions without cause.
Although the conservative majority claims to be “originalists,” they overruled a long-standing precedent (“Humphrey’s Executor”) which protected the independence of independent commissions, requiring the president to have cause for firing or removing a member of an independent commission.
Trump hailed the decision as “the Greatest Increase in Presidential Power in the last 100 years.”
Trump just removed three of the four remaining members of the Election Assistance Commission. He didn’t have to give a reason. Everyone (except members of the Federal Reserve) serves at his pleasure. By law, the four-member commission is supposed to be bipartisan, with two members from each party.
What makes this removal ominous is that Trump has made no secret of his desire to manipulate the election machinery to benefit his party. He wants to change the rules of eligibility, change the documentation, change mail-in voting, anything that might make it more difficult to vote.
L.C. Francis of the L.C. Francis Open Society for History & Civics warns about the dangers of removing an electoral safeguard on the cusp of an important election. Will any new commissioners be Trump partisans? Will they swear their loyalty to him? Will they agree that the 2020 election, which he lost decisively, was rigged?
L.C. Francis writes:
Trump could not force an independent commission to carry out his voting agenda. Less than four months before the midterms, he removed the entire leadership team.
“Power is of an encroaching nature, and ought to be effectually restrained from passing the limits assigned to it.”
—James Madison, Federalist No. 48
Dear Friends,
Imagine learning, over your first cup of coffee, that less than four months before a national election, every seat on the federal commission created to protect the machinery of that election is vacant. No commissioners remain to lead it, to question political pressure, or to stand between the White House and the rules beneath the ballot.
Donald Trump recently eliminated the last three members of the United States Election Assistance Commission, leaving all four positions vacant. Two commissioners were dismissed via email, while the third resigned after being informed of her imminent removal. Subsequently, the White House issued a statement that clarified the intent behind these actions: stating that election officials need to be “totally aligned” with the president’s agenda.
The issue at hand is that an election commission, originally meant to stay independent from presidential influence, has been undermined by a president who thinks its leadership should be aligned with him.
To fully understand what has been at stake, we need to return to Florida in 2000. Election workers held punch-card ballots up to the light while lawyers argued over hanging chads, incomplete punches, and the intentions of individual voters. The presidency turned on 537 votes, handing George W. Bush the Oval Office, and the country discovered that the right to vote depended on an aging and uneven election system that few Americans had ever considered.
After the chaos of the 2000 election, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act and established the Election Assistance Commission on the hard lesson that no president, party, or faction should control the machinery beneath the ballot. Its four members were evenly split between the parties, recommended by congressional leaders, confirmed by the Senate, and required to produce three votes before the commission could act.
The design was intentional because the agency manages voting-system standards, testing labs, election grants, and the national registration form, all of which influence an election well before any ballots are counted.
While researching this article, I was struck by James Madison’s warning that power tends to overreach. Congress learned this lesson and distributed authority over elections among the states, Congress, the courts, and an independent bipartisan commission. It’s important to remember that while the president may nominate members, he cannot legally turn the commission into an arm of his campaign or personal agenda.
Trump has already tried to cross that boundary.
In March 2025, he directed the commission to require documentary proof of citizenship on the federal registration form and sought to implement new rules for mail ballots and election funding. However, a federal court halted key parts of the initiative because the Constitution assigns the regulation of federal elections to Congress and the states, not the president.
He was unable to compel the commission to follow his order and has now dismissed everyone who had been managing it.
Trump is not currently in the Oval Office altering vote counts. Instead, he aims to influence the rules governing elections before votes are even cast, including who can register, what identification is required, which voting systems are permitted, and the extent of federal pressure on the states.
We still have lawful means to prevent the consolidation of power.
The commission needs three confirmed members to function legally. Any replacements must get Senate approval, and bipartisan membership is still required. Moreover, state attorneys general and secretaries of state can challenge illegal federal requests before Election Day.
In fact, election officials are authorized to publicly disclose all White House instructions, preserve all communications, and reject policies exceeding presidential authority. Courts can also issue injunctions against disputed rules before those rules reach voting ballots, registration offices, or voting machines.
The public must therefore monitor the replacement process with the same attention normally reserved for election night. The nominees’ names, records, testimony, and views on presidential power will determine whether the commission remains independent or becomes obedient in all but name.
Congress created this commission because the country learned in 2000 that an election can be lost in the machinery before a single result is announced. Trump has now cleared out his leadership as the nation prepares to decide whether to restrain his power. No serious citizen should mistake the timing as coincidence.
The chairs at the Election Assistance Commission may be empty, but the law has not surrendered them. Courts can still block unlawful executive action, as the Kennedy Center injunction proved. States can resist presidential interference, public records can expose what is being attempted, and every nominee can be scrutinized before obedience is allowed to pass for qualification.
The danger is not that our constitutional defenses have vanished…It’s that Americans may wait to use them until the damage is already done.
I’ve always believed that no president controls the machinery of an American election. It is ultimately owned by the states, the law, our Constitution, and, most importantly, We the People.
Vivat Constitution!
Diane Ravitch's blog 