Wilson Sonsini partner and former acting chair of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Maureen Ohlhausen recently joined a discussion with five former FTC chairs about the Supreme Court’s June 29, 2026, decision in Trump v. Slaughter and its implications for the future of the agency.

The Supreme Court held that the FTC’s statutory protection against removal except for cause is unconstitutional, overturning Humphrey’s Executor.

Maureen described the decision as “a long time coming,” noting that earlier Supreme Court decisions had foreshadowed the conclusion that the FTC exercises executive authority and should be subject to executive control.

Drawing on her experience at the FTC, Maureen explored what the decision could mean for the agency’s longstanding bipartisan and deliberative structure. She noted that bipartisan norms helped the Commission function effectively during her approximately year-and-a-half tenure as acting chair, when she did not have a majority. She also discussed whether preserving a bipartisan, deliberative Commission could benefit both the agency and the administration’s objectives.

Maureen also examined the broader implications for the FTC’s enforcement authority, including the breadth of Section 5 of the FTC Act. She expressed concern that its expansive language could permit the agency to regulate business conduct broadly and identified the nondelegation doctrine as a potential “next battle” over the scope of Congress’s delegation of authority to the executive branch.

Finally, Maureen raised a practical question: what happens if the FTC is left without a quorum? While the Department of Justice could handle federal antitrust matters, she noted that there is no comparable federal substitute for the FTC’s consumer protection authority. Without commissioners able to vote on complaints, settlements or rules, consumer protection enforcement could effectively pause at the federal level.

Maureen’s comments were part of a broader discussion about how the decision could affect the FTC’s structure, enforcement authority, and independence.

Read the full discussion on The Antitrust Source (subscription required).