Trump asks US Supreme Court to allow firing of Fed Governor Lisa Cook

[LetMyPeopleVote]

7. Here is a link to the filing

Link to tweet

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/26103308-cook-case-stay-app/
I love the concept that due process is what trump says it is

Even if Cook had a property interest in her office, her removal complied withthe Due Process Clause. “[D]ue process is flexible and calls for such procedural pro-tections as the particular situation demands.” Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 481(1972). And courts owe “deference to the political branches” when applying the DueProcess Clause to matters within the political branches’ special competence. Fuld v.PLO, 606 U.S. 1, 23 (2025). Courts have no basis for demanding more process for theremoval of a principal executive officer than the political branches choose to provide......

Cook received “notice of the charges” against her, Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 546,when the President publicized the criminal referral. See Compl. ¶ 43. The district court found the notice inadequate because it did not contain an “explanation of theevidence,” App., infra, 57a (ellipsis omitted), but the referral specifically identifiedthe contradictory representations in Cook’s mortgage documents, see p. 7, supra. The court did not say what more Cook needed to know.

Cook also had “an opportunity to present [her] side of the story,” Loudermill,470 U.S. at 546. The President made clear that he viewed Cook’s conduct as groundsto remove her, then waited five days for her to respond. The district court faulted thePresident for not “invit[ing] Cook to submit” evidence, App., infra, 58a, but the DueProcess Clause requires (at most) an opportunity to respond, not a formal invitation.Cook had an opportunity to explain why no misconduct occurred, and she spurned it.