Supreme Court Allows Lisa Cook to Remain At Fed, For Now

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday blocked President Donald J. Trump from removing Democratic Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, despite mounting allegations of mortgage and occupancy fraud.

Cook, a Biden appointee, will remain in her seat until oral arguments are heard in January 2026. The ruling effectively protects her position for the time being, even though the high court has previously allowed presidents to remove leaders of other agencies, such as the Federal Trade Commission.

This decision comes after Trump dismissed Cook in late August, citing a staff report alleging she misrepresented multiple properties on mortgage and ethics filings to obtain favorable loan terms.

Mounting Allegations of Fraud

Federal housing regulators have issued multiple criminal referrals against Cook. Bill Pulte, head of the U.S. Federal Housing Agency, confirmed a second referral and publicly accused Cook of filing inconsistent reports on a Cambridge, Massachusetts condominium.

According to Pulte, Cook claimed the condo was a “second home” on a 2021 mortgage application but described it as an “investment/rental property” just eight months later on a federal ethics disclosure.

Pulte alleged that Cook repeatedly changed her property designations to secure better loan conditions, listing her Atlanta condo as a primary residence while simultaneously claiming her Ann Arbor home as her permanent address. He added that she later reported renting out the Ann Arbor property while still calling it her residence.

“Three strikes and you’re out,” Pulte wrote on X, saying Cook’s filings showed a pattern of deception.

CNN legal analyst Elie Honig acknowledged the seriousness of the discrepancies, noting they could not be explained away as clerical errors.

“There’s three properties, OK? Within a two-week stretch, she gets a mortgage on a place in Michigan and says that’s her principal residence. Two weeks later, she gets a mortgage on a place in Atlanta and says that’s her primary residence. And now there’s a third place in Cambridge that she said was her secondary residence, but she’s actually renting it out,” Honig said Friday.

“Now, why would someone do all this? Because you get better interest rates, because you get better tax benefits,” he added.

Honig further dismissed Cook’s defense that the errors were unintentional. “That’s not gonna fly, because Lisa Cook is one of the most established, accomplished financial and economic experts in this country.”

Trump’s Constitutional Authority Challenged

In his removal letter, President Trump wrote:

“Pursuant to my authority under Article II of the Constitution of the United States and the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, as amended, you are hereby removed from your position on the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, effective immediately. I have determined that there is sufficient cause to remove you from your position.”

Cook, however, filed a lawsuit contesting her removal, naming President Trump, the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, and Chairman Jerome Powell as defendants. She is represented by Democratic attorneys Abbe Lowell and Norm Eisen.

The case has been assigned to a Biden-appointed judge.

Pulte insists Cook’s filings point to fraud with tax consequences, saying:

“We have obtained a document Lisa Cook submitted to the U.S. Government while serving as Federal Reserve Governor. In it, on February 28, 2023, she represents to the U.S. Government that the Atlanta property is her personal residence. However, Lisa Cook, as a then-sitting Fed Governor and six months earlier, on September 1, 2022, appears to have listed that same property for rent.”

Pulte argued that the timing of her loans shows lenders were unaware of each other’s underwriting processes, a tactic consistent with occupancy fraud.

A Double Standard?

The Court’s decision to shield Cook raises questions about political double standards. While the justices previously affirmed the president’s power to dismiss leaders of other federal agencies, they now appear to be treating the Federal Reserve as untouchable, despite its lack of accountability and the seriousness of the charges.

For conservatives, this case underscores the dangers of unelected, insulated bureaucrats operating without meaningful oversight — and raises alarms about the Court insulating Democrats from accountability while restricting a duly elected president’s constitutional authority.