US Privacy Board Democratic Members’ Dismissal Overturned (3)

Two Democrats from the US government’s top privacy and civil liberties watchdog were unlawfully fired by President Donald Trump, a federal district judge ruled Wednesday.

Congress intended to restrict the president from removing the United States Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board members at will, and that restriction is constitutional, Judge Reggie B. Walton of the US District Court for the District of Columbia ruled, granting a motion for summary judgment.

The firings of plaintiffs Travis LeBlanc and Edward Felten are null and void, the court said. The president isn’t subject to the permanent injunction, but other defendants are barred from treating LeBlanc and Felten as terminated, Walton said.

The ruling, by a George W. Bush appointee, is yet another in a series blocking Trump’s efforts to remove officials from several independent agencies including the National Labor Relations Board, the Merit Systems Protection Board, and the Federal Labor Relations Authority.

While the operative statute doesn’t explicitly state a restriction on executive firing, the Oversight Board’s structure and function as a multimember, nonpartisan, expert oversight board is operationally incompatible with at-will presidential removal, the court said.

Walton further said that the Oversight Board closely resembled the Federal Trade Commission in 1935 that Supreme Court reviewed in Humphrey’s Executor. That similarity confirmed that the restriction on the president’s power was constitutional.

Walton rejected the government’s urging that he read the operative statute narrowly, explaining that he declined to assume without clearer evidence that Congress intentionally created a separation of powers problem.

And the Oversight Board’s otherwise resultant lack of quorum constituted one of many factors weighing in favor of granting the plaintiffs’ injunctive relief, he said.

“There is a substantial public interest in the effective oversight of the government’s counterterrorism actions and authorities, which is furthered by independent, candid, and expert advice,” Walton said, “as it debates reauthorizing important—yet controversial—authorities” relating to privacy and civil liberties.

“I welcome the court’s decision restoring oversight, independence, and a quorum to a federal agency whose mission is the protection of our most precious civil liberties,” LeBlanc said in an statement . “Now we can get back to work. I look forward to promptly returning to the agency and continuing my service to the nation.”

The Justice Department press office didn’t immediately respond to a message seeking comment on the court’s ruling.

Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP represents LeBlanc and Felten.

The case is LeBlanc v. US Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, D.D.C., 5/21/25