Democracy in the Balance: The Supreme Court May Give Trump the Keys to the Media Kingdom
The latest kleptocratic actions by the Trump administration from the week of January 5, 2026
Since last September, the Supreme Court has been weighing Trump v. Slaughter, a case that could sharply undermine the independence of the media and regulatory landscape by granting the president sweeping new power to fire members of so‑called independent agencies. Instead of fixed‑term, partially insulated officials, the president seeks to treat the leaders of dozens of these agencies like at‑will employees in a family business (or contestants on his former TV show).
The facts of the case begin in March 2025, when Rebecca Slaughter, who was appointed a Commissioner at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) by President Trump in 2018, was removed from her position. She received her termination notice in an email from a White House official stating, “Your continued service on the FTC is inconsistent with my administration’s priorities.” In seeking to justify the dismissal, the Trump administration is advocating for a “unitary executive theory,” asserting that presidents maintain total policy control over every choice the executive branch makes.
The Big Picture
The removal and the theory fly in the face of the agency’s founding principles. The 1914 law establishing the FTC stipulated that a president could only remove commissioners for cause and that the five-member commission can have no more than three members of the same political party. Slaughter is one of two Democrats on the Commission—the other three are Republicans.
The removal also runs counter to a 90-year precedent set by the Supreme Court in 1935, known as Humphrey’s Executor. When President Franklin D. Roosevelt fired FTC member William Humphrey, the justices upheld the 1914 law establishing the FTC and limited the president to removing a commissioner only for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.”
Taking a step back from these legal constraints, we can also look to how the framers of the Constitution thought about this process. They intentionally limited the power of the State, creating three separate branches and checks to balance power and avoid autocratic manipulation by any single branch. The goal is accountability to standards, which should not be subject to the whims of any person or faction. As Slaughter herself has explained, “The alternative to allowing these agencies to operate as Congress designed is…accruing power to the president…That is something that would be concerning at any time, but really concerning when you have a president who is interested in wielding power for the benefit of himself, his friends and allies—and at the expense of everyday Americans.”
A ruling in Trump’s favor would have repercussions beyond the FTC. If the Supreme Court sides with Trump, it would effectively hand the president authority to curtail the independence of a wide range of agencies. This includes, for example, the Federal Communications Commission and Federal Elections Commission, which would endanger accountability critical for the democratic institutions that ensure freedom of expression and free and fair elections.
Why The FTC Matters, Especially Now
While ensuring that independent agencies remain truly independent is essential to the mission of any one of these agencies at any time, the FTC is at a particularly critical juncture. The FTC’s mission is to protect the public from deceptive business practices and unfair competition. The risk of corruption increases if deceptive business practices and unfair competition are not regulated independently.
Chief among these concerns is the sale of Warner Brothers Discovery (WBD), which includes CNN, a network that Trump has alleged is a “political arm of the Democratic party,” without any evidence. As detailed by WNYC’s On the Media podcast, Netflix and Paramount are vying to purchase Warner Brothers Discovery. Considered a “declining asset,” CNN is not included in the Netflix bid. Paramount is including CNN in its offer.
If Paramount is successful in its bid for WBD, the integrity and independence of CNN is likely to suffer. Paramount’s Chairman David Ellison (son of Republican mega donor Larry Ellison) has signaled that he would make sweeping changes to the network. The Paramount bid also includes financing from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar, none of which are known for their commitment to a free and independent press.
Since Trump’s election, the Ellison family has expanded their media influence at breakneck speed. In 2025, Paramount Global, which merged with Skydance News (also owned by the Ellisons) purchased CBS news. Since that takeover, the storied network has seen a number of shifts that benefit the Trump administration, including putting a conservative journalist with no broadcast experience in charge of CBS News, hiring a conservative think tank leader to review complaints about news bias, and pulling a 60 Minutes segment that reported on abuse allegations at the El Salvadoran mega-prison where Trump has sent hundreds of Venezuelan migrants. The Ellisons’ reach extends to social media as well. Just last month, TikTok signed a deal to sell its US operations to a group of investors led by...wait for it...Larry Ellison.
The Cost of Capture
In normal times, the FTC would step in to block such an expansive media merger. The potential harms of consolidation include greater political pressure and censorship, higher prices for consumers, reduced output, and labor market disruptions.
These times are far from normal though. If the Supreme Court rules as expected against Slaughter, the FTC is no longer answerable to the Constitution, but to the president. And as they’ve demonstrated with CBS News, the Ellisons will likely continue to put their thumbs on the scale in favor of the Trump administration. In short, shady business deals favorable to Trump, his family, and followers will be infinitely easier absent the check provided by the FTC and other independent agencies.
Weekly Wins
Trump Drops his Push to Keep the National Guard in Democratic Cities
Trump’s “tough on crime” cosplay took a hit last week thanks to the courts and a few blue‑state governors who refused to hand over their troops on command. After months of trying to use the National Guard for his crackdown in Chicago, Los Angeles, and Portland, Trump has now formally dropped his push to keep Guard units in those cities. Days earlier, the Supreme Court ruled that Trump had improperly federalized the Illinois National Guard to respond to unrest over immigration crackdowns in the Chicago area.
Federal Judge Blocks Policies Prohibiting Congressional Visits to Immigration Facilities
After weeks of lawsuits, protests, and harrowing accounts from families and lawyers about what "Operation Midway Blitz" actually looks like on the ground, members of Congress have gained access to ICE detention centers. Responding to a lawsuit filed by 12 Democratic legislators, a federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration from enforcing policies that limit congressional visits to immigration facilities. According to the Associated Press, legislators finally entered detention facilities In Illinois, California, and New York. In Los Angeles, Rep. Jimmy Gomez found there was no working kitchen, no on-site medical staff, and limited food options, while New York Reps. Dan Goldman and Adriano Espaillat criticized ICE for holding immigrants for as long as three days without access to showers and proper beds.
Federal Judge Requires the Release of Disaster Relief Funds to All States
One small but very real win for the idea that disaster aid shouldn’t be a partisan hostage: a federal judge blocked the Trump administration from using FEMA grant programs to reward political allies and punish everyone else. In a series of rulings sparked by lawsuits from Democratic‑led states, a federal magistrate judge blocked the administration from withholding disaster preparation grants to states if they don't recalculate their population figures to reflect recent deportations. The judge also found the administration had unlawfully shortened the period to spend funds. “Even giving Defendants the benefit of the doubt here, the Court finds the reasoning for each change to be lacking,” wrote US Magistrate Judge Amy Potter. The decisions will help keep life‑and‑death funding flowing to communities, and they reaffirm a basic rule that’s core to any functioning democracy: presidents don’t get to unilaterally rewrite Congress’s spending decisions to suit their friends, donors, or talking points.
More Links, More Kleptocracy
Build a Protection Racket
Bribes and influence peddling
Hundreds of Post-election donors benefitting from Trump’s return - New York Times
The 20-something billionaires ushering in a betting bonanza in Trump’s Washington - Politico
Cronyism and favoritism
rump’s pardons wipe out payments to defrauded victims - Washington Post
Trump pardons Tina Peters though he can’t erase state charges - CNN
Todd Blanche shuts down crypto regs while holding crypto investments- ProPublica
A $400,000 profit on Maduro’s capture raises insider trading questions on Polymarket - NPR
Get Rid of Independent Checks on Power
Executive power grabs
Centralizing executive authority
ICE plans $100 million ‘wartime recruitment’ push targeting gun shows, military fans for hires - Washington Post
Kennedy Center changed board rules months before vote to add Trump’s name - Washington Post
Beyond the federal government
Colorado faces $24m cut over illegal commercial driver’s licenses - AP
US suspends funds for needy families in five Democratic-led states - The Guardian
Control the Media and Suppress Free Speech
Limitations, control, and retaliatory litigation
Coordinate with Kleptocrats Abroad
Undermining US support for democracy activists abroad
Trump says Venezuelan opposition leader doesn’t have the ‘respect’ to govern after Maduro ousted - ABC News
Aligning with kleptocrats on the international stage
Witkoff’s Other Backer in His Unlikely Diplomatic Ascent: Putin - WSJ
Trump Admin Scores Visa for Founder of Russian Propaganda Outlet - The Bulwark