Supreme Court: Fed governor Lisa Cook to remain in office

The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook may remain in her post while it considers whether President Donald Trump has legal authority to remove her. Oral arguments in the case are scheduled for January 2026, ensuring Cook will continue to serve through the end of this year’s remaining Federal Reserve policy meetings.

The decision marks a setback for Trump, who sought to oust Cook from the Fed’s Board of Governors, citing allegations of mortgage fraud. The president alleges Cook made misleading statements on mortgage applications for homes in Michigan and Georgia, but Cook has denied any wrongdoing and has not been charged with any crime.

“The application for stay presented to The Chief Justice and by him referred to the Court is deferred pending oral argument in January 2026,” the court’s website said, offering no further explanation. The ruling leaves intact an appeals court decision that blocked Trump from firing Cook until the case is fully litigated.

“President Trump lawfully removed Lisa Cook for cause from the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. We look forward to ultimate victory after presenting our oral arguments before the Supreme Court in January,” spokesman Kush Desai said in a statement. Under the Federal Reserve Act, governors can be removed “for cause,” but the statute does not define the term or specify who decides whether that threshold is met.

Economists and policymakers warn that allowing presidents to determine cause at will would erode the Fed’s insulation from political pressure. In a friend-of-the-court brief, a bipartisan group of former central bank officials — including all three living former Fed chairs — cautioned that granting Trump’s request to immediately remove Cook “would upset these longstanding protections and the essential functions they serve.”

They added that undermining Fed independence “would expose the Federal Reserve to political influences, thereby eroding public confidence in the Fed’s independence and jeopardizing the credibility and efficacy of U.S. monetary policy.”