Why It Matters
A Supreme Court decision from late June has upended the legal foundations of independent regulatory agencies. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee will hold an oversight hearing on Wednesday, July 22, examining whether the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) can survive a 6-3 Supreme Court ruling that eliminated statutory protections against presidential removal of agency commissioners. At stake is whether FERC, which oversees electricity markets, natural gas pipelines, and hydropower across the country, can continue operating as intended, or whether it becomes subject to wholesale staff changes every time a new president takes office.
The Big Picture
The Trump v. Slaughter decision struck down removal protections that had stood for 90 years. Legal analysts at Vinson & Elkins concluded that FERC commissioners are very likely subject to removal from office by the President at will following the ruling. The Congressional Research Service noted that FERC is among dozens of agencies headed by multimember boards or commissions with similar or identical statutory removal provisions to the Federal Trade Commission, the agency directly affected by the decision.
Former FERC commissioners warned the ruling could lead to a loss of quorum at FERC, leaving it unable to issue substantive orders, and that it could cause the commission to lurch in different policy directions depending on who wins the presidency every four years.
Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) chairs the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, with Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM) serving as Ranking Member. Both have signaled bipartisan interest in examining how FERC will function under the legal framework established by Trump v. Slaughter. Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA), a committee member, issued a formal statement criticizing the ruling.
The timing of the hearing comes just days after FERC on June 18 ordered all six regional grid operators to justify or reform tariffs governing how data centers and other large energy users connect to the grid. FERC described the action as groundbreaking and historic. The Society of Environmental Journalists noted that the ruling potentially gives Trump and his successors the authority to fire members of agencies that regulate the transmission of electricity, gas, oil and nuclear power.
Worth Noting
Several entities with interests before FERC have been active in recent lobbying disclosures. Southern Co. filed disclosures in quarter four of 2025, quarter one of 2026, and quarter two of 2026, each reporting $50,000 in activity through LJ Consulting LLC and covering energy policy, nuclear energy, and FERC issues. American Efficient LLC lobbied on FERC litigation issues through Capitol Counsel LLC, filing a disclosure in quarter four of 2025 and terminating its registration in quarter one of 2026. The City of Lake Elsinore, California filed disclosures in quarter two, quarter three, and quarter four of 2025, covering FERC issues and water issues.
The Bottom Line
The July 22 hearing gives Lee and Heinrich a bipartisan platform to press FERC on how it intends to function now that its commissioners serve at the president's will rather than under for-cause protection. Lobbying activity is already concentrated around FERC's energy, nuclear, and utility portfolio, and the commission is mid-stride on its data center interconnection push, meaning any shift in FERC's independence carries direct consequences for the industries and localities with the most at stake before it. How Congress and FERC respond to Trump v. Slaughter in the coming weeks will help determine whether the commission continues setting energy policy on technical grounds or becomes more directly exposed to turnover with each change in administration.
Access the Legis1 platform for comprehensive political news, data, and insights.
Spot something wrong? Report an issue with this article