Donald Trump’s administration has turned to the U.S. Supreme Court in a bid to validate his authority to dismiss Shira Perlmutter, the head of the U.S. Copyright Office—an act that has become the latest test of how far presidential power can reach into independent federal institutions.
The Justice Department has urged the Court to overturn a lower court’s order that temporarily restored Perlmutter to her post, arguing that Trump’s decision was constitutionally sound and that the judiciary had overreached by reversing it.
Perlmutter was abruptly removed on May 10, a day after her office released a report questioning the legality of using copyrighted material to train generative AI models—a coincidence that sent shockwaves through Washington’s legal and tech circles. In her lawsuit, Perlmutter contends that only the Librarian of Congress, not the president, has the statutory authority to terminate her.
The controversy intensified when Trump also ousted Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden, replacing her with an acting head of his own choosing—an action Perlmutter’s counsel characterized as a “power grab” undermining the office’s independence.
Initially, U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly declined to reinstate Perlmutter, finding her case did not show “irreparable harm.” But the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals later reversed that decision, calling Trump’s intervention a “clear breach” of the law protecting the office’s autonomy. Judge Florence Pan, writing for the appellate panel, cautioned that the president’s move risked violating the constitutional balance between the executive and legislative branches.
With the Supreme Court now set to weigh in, the dispute could reshape the limits of presidential control over independent agencies. The Court—currently inclined toward broader executive powers—has already backed Trump’s removals of several officials and is preparing to hear related cases involving his attempts to dismiss a Federal Reserve governor and an FTC commissioner.
Perlmutter has until November 10 to respond to the government’s petition, marking the next step in a constitutional showdown that could redefine how insulated independent offices truly are from the White House’s reach.
