The newly reinstated Trump administration faces its first major constitutional challenge over presidential authority to dismiss federal officials.

According to The Epoch Times, the administration has petitioned the Supreme Court to permit the termination of Hampton Dellinger, who heads the Office of Special Counsel, after lower courts blocked the president's attempt to remove him. 

Dellinger, nominated by former President Biden and confirmed by the Senate with a narrow 49-47 vote in February 2024, received an abrupt email on February 7 notifying him of his termination without explanation.

The special counsel maintains that his five-year term appointment shields him from removal except for specific causes of misconduct.

Presidential powers clash with tenure protections

The Trump administration argues forcefully for broad executive authority in removing agency heads. Their Supreme Court filing emphasizes the constitutional basis for presidential power to dismiss senior officials at will, particularly those heading independent agencies.

Department of Justice officials have taken an aggressive stance against existing precedent. Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris explicitly stated in a letter to Senator Dick Durbin that the department considers current tenure protections unconstitutional.

The administration's legal team maintains that lower courts have overstepped their authority by blocking Dellinger's removal. They argue this judicial intervention threatens the fundamental separation of powers in government operations.

Multiple courts reject immediate termination attempts

Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia delivered the first setback to the administration's plans. She issued a temporary restraining order on February 12 that allowed Dellinger to retain his position.

In her order, Jackson criticized the administration's approach. Judge Jackson stated:

The relief requested by the government is a sharp departure from established procedures that balance and protect the interests of litigants, and ensure the orderly consideration of cases before the district court and this court.

The D.C. Circuit Court subsequently upheld Jackson's decision in a 2-1 ruling, though Circuit Judge Gregory Katsas issued a dissenting opinion supporting presidential authority in such matters.

Legal battle timeline intensifies toward resolution

The case continues its rapid progression through the judicial system. Judge Jackson has set a tight schedule for upcoming proceedings, with Dellinger required to respond to the government's opposition by February 20.

The administration must submit its explanation for seeking case dismissal by February 21. This accelerated timeline reflects the urgency of resolving the constitutional questions at stake.

A crucial hearing scheduled for February 26 will determine whether to convert the temporary restraining order into a preliminary injunction, potentially extending Dellinger's protection from removal.

Defining moment awaits Supreme Court review

The Supreme Court now faces pressure to address fundamental questions about presidential power and agency independence. The case presents an opportunity to revisit decades-old precedents regarding tenure protections for federal officials.

This legal confrontation occurs against a backdrop of other challenges to Trump administration policies. Various courts have already issued temporary restraining orders blocking several initiatives, including attempts to modify birthright citizenship rules.

The outcome could significantly impact the relationship between the executive branch and independent federal agencies, potentially reshaping the balance of power in Washington.

Case implications and next steps

The dispute over Dellinger's position as Special Counsel chief represents the Trump administration's first Supreme Court challenge since returning to power in January 2025. The high-stakes legal battle questions the extent of presidential authority to remove Senate-confirmed officials leading independent agencies.

The case awaits official docketing at the Supreme Court, expected on February 18, while concurrent proceedings continue in lower courts. The ultimate resolution will likely establish important precedents regarding executive power and the independence of federal agencies tasked with oversight responsibilities.