Reiter Examines Evolving Questions Surrounding Federal Agency Authority in Yale Journal on Regulation

08.12.2026

Stinson LLP Senior Counsel Harvey Reiter authored a Yale Journal on Regulation article examining the potential consequences of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. Slaughter and subsequent lower court rulings addressing the constitutional structure and operation of federal administrative agencies.

In the article, Reiter explains that the Supreme Court's decision overturning Humphrey's Executor v. United States, which had for decades upheld statutory protections limiting the president's ability to remove members of certain multimember agencies, has raised questions extending beyond the tenure of agency officials. He examines whether the removal protections can be severed from the broader statutory frameworks governing agencies such as the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and other independent agencies without affecting their ability to carry out their statutory functions.

Reiter analyzes two recent federal district court decisions involving the NLRB that reached different conclusions about whether the unconstitutional removal protections could be severed from the agencies' governing statutes while leaving the broader statutory framework intact. He explains how these competing approaches could shape future challenges to agency authority, including arguments that an agency's unconstitutional structure could affect the validity of its investigations or other actions, as well as litigation involving FERC and other multimember agencies.

Reiter brings deep experience before the FERC and federal appellate courts. With over 20 oral arguments in federal circuit courts, he advises clients across electric utilities, state regulators, and consumer advocate offices on a broad range of regulatory issues.

Visit the Yale Journal on Regulation to read more.