Donald Trump does not quit easily.
The Supreme Court blocked his first attempt to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, and he told the world he was coming back for round two.
Now he has done exactly that, and the legal battle over who controls the most powerful central bank on earth is heating up all over again.
Trump Follows Through on His Vow
Deputy White House Chief of Staff Daniel Scavino sent a letter to Cook this week, demanding that she respond to allegations that she made false statements on mortgage applications.
In the letter obtained by the Associated Press, White House aide Dan Scavino told Cook that Trump was “considering removing you from your position” but cited the Supreme Court’s requirement of proper notice in giving her until August 26 to challenge it.
The letter states: “Even if your conduct does not rise to the level of a felony offense, it appears to demonstrate a level of gross negligence in financial transactions that calls into question your competence and trustworthiness as a financial regulator.”
While the letter alleged that Cook committed crimes that could be punished by up to 30 years in prison, Scavino argued that her conduct constituted negligence that calls into question her trustworthiness as a Federal Reserve Governor, even if the allegations do not amount to a crime.
The administration accuses Cook of fraudulently listing homes in Michigan and Georgia as a “primary residence” to secure more favorable terms on loans when she obtained mortgages in 2021.
Those charges were first raised by Trump ally William Pulte, who oversees mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Cook has denied any wrongdoing and has not been charged with a crime.
And her attorney was not quiet about it.
“These allegations are as baseless now as they were a year ago when President Trump tried to remove Governor Cook and interfere with the independence of the Federal Reserve,” Cook’s attorney Abbe Lowell said in a statement.
How the Supreme Court Left the Door Open
In August 2025, President Trump purported to fire Cook, a member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Cook was the first Governor to be fired in the central bank’s 111-year history.
The nation’s highest court, in a 5-4 decision, rejected Trump’s bid to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook while her legal challenge moves forward.
The court concluded that the Federal Reserve is different from other independent agencies, in part based on its unique structure and history.
But the ruling was narrower than it looked on the surface.
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in a footnote in his opinion that nothing forbids President Donald Trump from “trying again” to fire Cook, provided she is given proper notice and a chance to contest it.
“Only after Cook has had the opportunity to respond to the charges made against her . . . may a final decision be made,” Roberts wrote. “And only then can the courts assess the validity and sufficiency of such charges.”
Trump posted on Truth Social: “The Cook Lawsuit, having to do with her suitability in sitting on the Board of the Federal Reserve, was sent back by the Supreme Court on a strictly procedural basis, we will take appropriate action immediately to make sure that someone who has committed wrongdoing will not be making vital decisions concerning the Welfare of the United States of America!”
That was not a bluff.
In the same ruling, the justices allowed Cook to keep her job while green-lighting the president’s firing of another Democrat appointee to an independent body, FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter.
The court ruled in the Cook case the same day it expanded presidential powers via a decision in a different case, affirming Trump’s firing of Federal Trade Commission Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter. That broader expansion of executive authority over independent agencies is the real story the media has largely buried in the fine print.
What This Fight Is Really About
Trump has railed against Fed Chair Jerome Powell and publicly mused about firing him, which he is not allowed to do without cause.
He has also celebrated the early resignation of Democrat Fed Governor Adriana Kugler, which gave him the opportunity to install a fourth Republican on the seven-member Board. If Trump successfully terminates Cook, he will have a chance to install a fifth.
Cook became the first Black woman to serve on the Fed Board in 2022, with a term set to expire in 2024. Biden in 2023 reappointed her to a new 14-year term that is set to expire in January 2038.
A Biden appointee sitting on the most powerful monetary policy body in the world through 2038 — while a president who ran on economic relief for working Americans demands rate cuts — is a tension that was never going to resolve itself quietly.
The same week the letter was dated, Cook spoke at an economic luncheon in Alaska, saying inflation is “too high” and indicating that she is “prepared to act” by raising interest rates, a position shared by others at the Federal Reserve.
Raising rates. While working families are already stretched thin by years of Biden-era inflation. That is the policy Trump is fighting against, and it is worth understanding that the dispute over Cook is not just a personnel squabble — it is a direct collision between an elected president trying to deliver lower borrowing costs to ordinary Americans and an entrenched bureaucratic structure that answers to nobody at the ballot box.
In June, the Supreme Court ruled 5 to 4 that the Federal Reserve occupies a special place in the US government and that presidents can only remove Fed governors for cause. It will be up to lower courts to decide whether the allegations against Cook meet that standard.
So the fight moves back down the judicial ladder, probably for another year or more. The Trump administration is appealing a lower-court ruling in Cook’s favor. Cook’s legal team has pledged to keep fighting, and the underlying question — whether a president can remove a Fed governor for conduct unrelated to monetary policy — remains genuinely unsettled law.
What is settled is that Trump is not walking away from this one. He said he would come back, he spelled out exactly what the Supreme Court required him to do, and then he did it. Whether the courts ultimately side with him or not, the pressure on the Federal Reserve to reckon with the accountability question is not going away.
And that may be the point.
Sources: Mediaite, PBS NewsHour, Associated Press, SCOTUSblog, Bloomberg, ABC News, NPR, Fox Business, US Supreme Court opinion (25A312), Federal Reserve Board press releases