Trump Begs Supreme Court to Let Him Corruptly Fire Lisa Cook

President Donald Trump is asking the Supreme Court to give him permission to fire whomever he wants—as long as he can come up with a reason.

The Trump administration went running to the Supreme Court Thursday to back up its efforts to oust Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled 2–1 Monday along ideological lines to block Cook’s removal, saying that she was likely to succeed in her statutory claim that she’d been fired without “cause,” as well as her procedural claim that she did not receive due process prior to her removal.

Trump’s attorney John D. Sauer submitted a request to stay the preliminary injunction Thursday, arguing that Cook was not entitled to due process and that Trump has a sweeping discretion to fire whomever he wanted as long as he claimed it was related to their job.

“The Federal Reserve Act’s broad ‘for cause’ provision rules out removal for no reason at all, or for policy disagreement,” Sauer wrote. “But so long as the President identifies a cause, the determination of ‘some cause relating to the conduct, ability, fitness, or competence of the officer’ is within the President’s unreviewable discretion,” Sauer wrote.

“The President’s strong concerns about the appearance of mortgage fraud, based on facially contradictory representations made to obtain mortgages by someone whose job is to set interest rates that affect Americans’ mortgages, satisfies any conception of cause,” Sauer continued.

(One might wonder if the same strong concerns would also apply to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who also made contradictory mortgage pledges, in his role shaping domestic and international economic policy.)

A federal district court had previously ruled that Trump couldn’t fire Cook over unproven allegations of mortgage fraud from Federal Housing Finance Agency Director William Pulte—who’s made similar accusations against a number of the president’s enemies—because it had nothing to do with her actual job. “For cause” typically refers to serious misconduct, or a neglect of duty.

Since Trump hit the campaign trail, the Supreme Court has been located securely in the president’s pocket, granting him “immunity” and then green-lighting move after move of his sweeping agenda when he resumed office. Despite the rulings of lower courts, it’s entirely possible this trend will continue.

The Federal Communications Commission’s involvement in canceling Jimmy Kimmel’s late-night show not only appears to have violated the First Amendment, but it also defied one of Donald Trump’s own executive orders.

Jimmy Kimmel Live! was put on indefinite hiatus Wednesday by Nexstar, one of the largest owners of ABC stations in the country, over supposedly controversial comments that Kimmel made about the political affiliation of Charlie Kirk’s suspected assassin. (Kimmel said that MAGA was rushing to claim that Tyler Robinson was “anything other than one of them”—which is technically true.)

The network, which is in the midst of a multibillion-dollar acquisition that requires the FCC’s approval, yanked Kimmel hours after the federal agency’s leader, Brendan Carr, publicly threatened to revoke the broadcast licenses of anyone still platforming the comedian.

But beyond the flagrant infringement by the government on Kimmel’s freedom of speech, the irony of Carr’s command is that it also breached the Trump administration’s own policies.

One of the first executive orders that Trump signed when he returned to office in January promised to ensure that “no Federal Government officer, employee, or agent” would engage or facilitate “any conduct that would unconstitutionally abridge the free speech of any American citizen.”

It also swore that “no taxpayer resources” would be used to similarly restrict a citizen’s First Amendment right to free speech.

The discrepancy should sic Attorney General Pam Bondi on Carr, as the order instructed should happen for any potential free speech infringements that the Trump administration deemed had occurred during the prior presidential administration.

Regardless, Nexstar’s decision was widely celebrated by conservatives. Trump wrote on Truth Social that Nexstar’s decision to unplug Kimmel was “great news for America,” while Carr commented to The Hollywood Reporter that the broadcast network was “doing the right thing.” Both suggested that more of America’s major television companies should follow suit.

President Trump took some time out of his press conference with British Prime Minister Kier Starmer to throw more dirt on Jimmy Kimmel’s name and mislead the public about why he was actually fired Wednesday night. 

“We saw the dismissal of a very well-known chat show host in America last night, Mr. Kimmel,” a British journalist asked Trump. 

“Well, Jimmy Kimmel was fired because he had bad ratings more than anything else, and he said a horrible thing about a great gentleman known as Charlie Kirk,” Trump replied. “And Jimmy Kimmel is not a talented person; he had very bad ratings. And they should’ve fired him a long time ago. So y’know, you can call that free speech or not. He was fired for lack of talent.” 

It seems clear at this point that Kimmel was fired because he dared to poke fun at Trump’s very flippant reaction to a question about Kirk’s death. Kimmel didn’t say anything that horrible, other than quoting Trump directly and noting that the administration was pushing Kirk’s shooter as a leftist terrorist without proper evidence.

The president and his administration, having already been trending toward McCarthyism for months, had their feelings hurt, and made FCC head Brendan Carr threaten to revoke the broadcasting licenses of ABC if it didn’t properly reprimand Kimmel.  

Trump trying to convince people that Kimmel mostly got fired because he was a bad host is facetious at best. 

For at least the third time, President Donald Trump on Thursday mistook the country of Armenia for Albania, falsely claiming he’d brought an end to an Azerbaijan-Albania conflict that never took place. The gaffe came during a press conference in England, where the president touted his purported record as a peacemaker.

Attempting to mention a peace declaration he arranged, laying the groundwork to end a decades-long conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia, Trump said: “To think that we settled … uh … Azerbaijan and Albania, as an example.” (Beyond the country mix-up, the president botched the pronunciation of Azerbaijan, saying something like “Aber … baijan” instead.)

The 79-year-old president made an identical flub in an August 19 appearance on a conservative radio show. “You saw the Aber … baijan,” Trump told the host (his mispronunciation so egregious that the show’s transcript registered it as “Arab or Bhaijaan”). “That was a big one going on for 34, 35 years with, uh, Albania. Think of that.”

In a Fox News appearance last week, he again boasted about brokering peace between “Azerbaijan and Albania.”

“It was going on for years,” the president said Thursday of the ongoing conflict. “It was never going to be settled. If you remember, the prime minister and the presidents, they were there for many years. They said—when they were in my office, we settled. And they started off at both sides of the Oval Office. So far away. I didn’t know you could be so far away. And as we were together for an hour, they kept getting closer, closer. And by the time we finished, we all hugged each other.”

A Trump-appointed federal judge on Thursday shredded the administration’s flimsy excuse for trying to secretly deport children over Labor Day weekend. 

U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly wrote that the government’s claim that it had yanked children out of their beds to hastily reunite them with their parents in Guatemala had “crumbled like a house of cards.”

“There is no evidence before the Court that the parents of these children sought their return,” Kelly wrote in a 43-page filing. “To the contrary, the Guatemalan Attorney General reports that officials could not even track down parents for most of the children whom Defendants found eligible for their ‘reunification’ plan. And none of those that were located had asked for their children to come back to Guatemala.”

The judge excoriated the Trump administration’s defense for the children’s expedited removal, saying the government had “come up short on both the law and facts,” and “misstate[d] the legal standard” in trying to undermine the commonality requirement for a class-action lawsuit. 

“In any event, the record here is barren of evidence that any child in the proposed class wants to return to Guatemala, even if their parents can be found. All the evidence suggests the opposite: Plaintiffs have offered over 30 declarations from Guatemalan children who object to being sent back,” Kelly wrote. 

Earlier this month, White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller claimed that a judge who’d initially blocked the children’s deportation was “effectively kidnapping these migrant children and refusing to let them return home to their parents in their home country.”

Kelly also slammed the Trump administration’s claim that it would not deport children deemed ineligible for removal, “given the possibility that Defendants may alter their criteria and then act in a way that would prevent judicial review, the risk of irremediable harm.”

“They cite no statute, regulation, or even policy statement requiring them. That means there is no legal roadblock preventing Defendants from changing the criteria (or how they interpret them) tomorrow, placing a currently non-eligible child onto the eligibility list, and hustling that child out of the country as they tried to do over Labor Day weekend,” Kelly wrote.  

He added that the government’s conduct plainly suggested the administration was “not applying their criteria accurately, consistently, or in ways that reflect good faith,” because it had attempted to rush the children out in the middle of the night on a holiday weekend, leaving little opportunity for legal intervention.