Reminder: U.S. Supreme Court is entering the final week of its term and could issue a decision as soon as Monday, June 29th on whether Fed G

President Trump announced her firing last August, marking the first time a president has attempted to dismiss a sitting Fed governor.

Lower courts have sided with Cook, allowing her to continue serving while the case advanced, citing the statutory protection that governors can only be removed "for cause"—a standard never before tested in the courts. - - Trump justified the move by pointing to alleged misstatements on Cook's home mortgage application, but the action has been widely viewed as an effort to assert greater White House control over the Fed and install loyalists after frustration with the central bank's resistance to steep rate cuts.

In earlier hearings, several justices appeared skeptical of the administration's arguments. - - Prior Supreme Court precedents have distinguished the Fed's structure from other independent agencies, leading legal observers to anticipate a ruling that upholds protections for monetary policymakers and safeguards the institution's operational independence from direct political interference. - - A decision allowing Cook to stay would eliminate a significant risk for new Fed Chair Kevin Warsh, whose leadership could otherwise face repeated disruptive firings.

It would also reinforce limits on presidential influence over interest-rate decisions at a time when inflation remains elevated above the Fed's 2% target.

Warsh has already signaled a preference for minimal forward guidance, focusing instead on data-driven responses, an approach that could help manage expectations in Washington while being tested internationally in the coming days.