Trump's ability to fire executives of independent agencies

Here's the Appointments Clause, Article II Section 2, presidential
powers:

and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of
the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers
and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers
of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein
otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law:
but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such
inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone,
in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

The controversy is whether there is a "negative" appointment power to be
construed, that the power to fire is inferred. This is hard to infer,
given "the Congress may by Law" language. Congress had been creating
independent agencies and restricted the president's ability to fire "for
good cause".

There are two Supreme Court cases at issue. The older case is Myers v.
US (1925) with an opinion written by Chief Justice Taft (former
president) suggesting but not flat out stating that "for good cause"
language was unconstitutional. However, this was "reversed" during FDR
which upheld "for good cause", restricting his ability to fire
appointees from prior administrations.

Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52 (1926)

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/272/52/

Humphrey's Executor v. United States, 295 U.S. 602 (1935)

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/295/602/

As always, Supreme Court decisions are written based on political changes
in the Republican party. Both were Republican courts.

Nice discussion with a law professor.

https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/04/will-the-court-overturn-a-1930s-precedent-to-expand-presidential-power-again/